Feminist Library says TWAW - are they in breach of trust of the many women who have donated their personal papers to them?

[stumbledin]

There was a recent thread on facebook where it was shared that the Feminist Library no longer had a women only policy:

Any ‘women only’ events organised at the Library must be inclusive of all self-identifying women, and we ask groups to make this clear when promoting events. No group is permitted to organise events contrary to this at the Library. feministlibrary.co.uk/about/community-policy/

What was also raised in the facebook thread is how does this revisionist (reactionary) policy impact on the original aims of the Feminist Library (then the Women's Research and Resource Centre) that gave women who dontated their personal papers to them the assurance that they would only be made available to other women.

Shouldn't they be contacting all the women who donated papers of this change. And if women asked for their papers back the Feminist Library would cease to be a valuable resource for feminist research.

And also, in terms of recent fundraising to move to new premises, mean that they have raised money on false pretenses. ie that their boast that they have been "Archiving our herstories since 1975" isn't true as in fact they have become a different organisation with different aims.

Such a shame to see yet another women's organisation get co-opted in to trans queer politics. But also given their wanting to be linked to academic research networks, that they are now less open to discussion than the academics who have written to the papers (was it the Times) saying Stonewall training is stifling debate.

And again from the facebook discussion, if they are saying TWAW aren't they going to have to move most of their feminist texts onto a shelf labelled "transphobia"?!

Also, forbidding groups from organising women-only events is unlawful discrimination. As per the Equality Act, sex is a protected characteristic. Organising on the basis of sex is legal. Just to illustrate how much this goes against the EqA, imagine the library saying that no neuroatypical-only group or deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-only group, no Jewish-only group, no pensioner-only or under-18s-only group is allowed.

It really is time for the legal professionals amongst us to challenge these places on the basis of violating the law.

(Although I suspect, breaching the terms and conditions under which women entrusted their papers to them is both more obviously morally repugnant and easier to challenge.)

Any ‘BAME only’ events organised at the Library must be inclusive of all self-identifying BAME people, and we ask groups to make this clear when promoting events.

Any ‘children only’ events organised at the Library must be inclusive of all self-identifying children, and we ask groups to make this clear when promoting events.

Any ‘breastcancer survivors only’ events organised at the Library must be inclusive of all self-identifying breast cancer survivors, and we ask groups to make this clear when promoting events.

And so on. Obviously no one ever says these because you really can't identify as belonging to any of these groups. You either are a child, a BAME person or someone who survived breast cancer or you are not.

This is inviting a test case on whether they can ignore protected characteristic.

Yeah it seems they have become a different organisation

They are just for anyone now so they should make that clear and change their name
Will they be doing a burning of books and papers that don’t agree with them

Actually reading that policy it seems same as that lighthouse book shop policy

Brains fallen out both of them

So much blah blah blah wokie signalling

It's weird though, I went to an event there to hear Max Dashu speak. At that particular time there was t*rf witch hunt against Max and she spoke about it. The staff at the event seemed very supportive of her actually, very supportive. They got TRA shit for even hosting. Oh of course they did. That night was very gender critical. Make of that what you will.

I think they are in a very difficult position. Who'd want to be in the middle of TRAs and us? I know, I know, everyone should be brave..... But my God it's hard.

Personally I wouldn't make them the front line in this. They seem vulnerable.

I dunno kat. I think feminists should centre women and girls

Reading that policy I would not visit it if I was to go to London as I would feel uncomfortable knowing that they felt that way

KatvonHostileExtremist on the one hand, I agree with you. Can't help thinking that this policy is to keep the wolves at bay. Putting aside all other issues for the moment, they are vulnerable by their very nature as all community and charity organisations dedicated solely to women and girls now are. However, appeasement only works for so long. And they will be tested for their commitment to TWAW, as all women's services in Scotland have been for instance, who are regularly contacted about their trans inclusion policies and who know - as the manager of one such organisation told me - that they cannot answer honestly which is that they continue to deliver strictly female-only services while also separately helping males who identify as trans.

On the other hand, every organisation that choses an appeasement strategy even if they are not on board with TWAW contribute to and worsen the hostile environment we find ourselves in. I'm not suggesting anyone should sue them, but they need to be informed that their policy of prohibiting women-only groups is unlawful. And if my grandmother for instance had donated her diaries I would be asking for them back right now.

Yeah appeasements seem to only work for so long

Might as well stand up for what you should be standing up for

"I went to an event there to hear Max Dashu speak. At that particular time there was t*rf witch hunt against Max and she spoke about it. The staff at the event seemed very supportive of her actually, very supportive. They got TRA shit for even hosting. Oh of course they did. That night was very gender critical. Make of that what you will.
I think they are in a very difficult position. Who'd want to be in the middle of TRAs and us? I know, I know, everyone should be brave..... But my God it's hard.
Personally I wouldn't make them the front line in this. They seem vulnerable."

Kat I was there, too, and feeling visceral relief at being able to listen to heretical feminist ideas, and speak openly. I assumed they were one of the last bastions of heretical feminism...

I agree with Charlie that appeasement strategies don't play out well long term. The extremist activists are never satisfied. There is no rational point in capitulating, because doing so doesn't ultimately protect you from entitled narcissists.

How could we support the library to defend their original boundaries? We can't pay for round the clock security to deter the crazies, but perhaps we could help in another way...

"This is inviting a test case on whether they can ignore protected characteristic."

It's too late, though, isn't it Apollo? If a K Nixon type were now to insert themselves into the situation, destructively, the library has already committed to accommodating them regardless of the cost to woman-centred feminism. Vancouver Rape Relief held the line, and consolidated it. The Feminist Library has already ceded it.

We really could do with a women's organisation actively defending their use of the single-sex exemption, so the issues can be heard in court, and a judge re-confirm that women do still have sex-based rights. All it would take is one org...a hefty crowfunder...a lot of vocal women making a lot of noise...

Only briefing dropping back in but found response really interesting and thoughtful.

It does seem that the public statement of a TWAW policy is relatively new as on the facebook thread other women spoke of going to meetings there. So maybe a (behind the scenes?) challenge would be appropriate.

Is any one a member or user?

Also, why isn't it policy to have a policy that states they welcome meetings that are gender identity inclusive, but obviously support the right of women only meetings under the tersm of the EA?

I think this is what is so (doubly) disheartening, the unwillingness to use the legal protection for women only services (eg what if women surviving male violence wanted to book a meeting there). That is what is so offensive and makes it look like another of the step by step takeover of women's (historical) achievements.

I appreciate much of the work is by volunteers, but why? Why volunteer to save the Library by changing it into something else? ie saving it destroys it.

If it's an appeasement strategy then it's a bad call. I understand why - they've been fundraising for the new premises and they don't want time, energy and funds swallowed up by defending themselves against attacks. But by inviting everyone in, you can't then complain about the results. Once the ground is given, it is so, so hard to get it back.

If everyone is acting as if Self ID is already the law, then the GRA amendment will happen.

I can't believe how many people have just caved. Lip service to being woman centered. Why do organisations purporting to centre women think that they were set up in the first place?

I volunteered there many years ago as a very young woman. It was my first experience of feminist community, and I remember being amazed by the collection. I knew that I wasn't a third-wave libfem, but I'd felt quite alone in that belief until I spoke to other women there and read some of the classical radfem texts.

Reading this makes me feel sad. It feels disrespectful of women's history to me. The Feminist Library, of all places, should know what a woman is.

I know it's depressing, I just feel a bit sorry for them. We all know the obsessive wrath of the TRAs in their need for validation. They'd crumple this place up in seconds. When women say no, then they absolutely must have it, because that's clearly the key to womanhood.

They seemed so underfunded and small, I just feel a bit for them. I would hate to be in the centre of this. Yes, I am a coward!