Action Aid - no such thing as a biological female

[Apileofballyhoo]

Has this been posted already? It's from an email they sent. I saw it on Twitter so I'll be back with links.

That letter, happydappy They’ve got it completely arse about face!

Trans inclusion in their line of work (if it were necessary, which I’m not sure it is) would focus on trans boys, FFS. No male child identifying as trans is being excluded from school because of period poverty, or because they’re at risk of forced marriage or FGM.

I’m horrified that they’ve got this quite so wrong.

I would think that maybe they do need to pay heed to trans boys/men. Surely this can be a phenomenon in the places they work - girls not having the luxury to ponder their 'gender expression' but needing to hide their sex in order to gain education, work or just plain old avoid getting married off and/or raped?

Although it's infuriating and ridiculous in equal measure, it's not really surprising.

I'd imagine that charities are stuffed to the gunnels with activist arts graduates who will all have been marinated in PoMo/Critical Theory/Queer Theory as that's been the orthodoxy in the academy for at least 40 years. I'd be surprised if those actually delivering the services believe the pish that those running the show claim to believe.

What we've been seeing happening culturally for the past wee while is the result. I used to think the genderist stance was an isolated bit of madness but reading the work of James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose and others (with whom I don't always agree) has really helped me to see that genderism is part of a much bigger picture. This way of seeing the world and acting in it has been happening for quite a while. And much of it is terrifying.

Genderist beliefs are luxury beliefs, only the most privileged have time and resources to spend fretting about their identities and forcing other people to do the same when on a global level for so many it's their actual material reality that's the biggest concern. One would think that would be the focus for organisations such as Action Aid.

This is nonsensical

Their stance seems to be

When looking to support women and girls they still include transwomen and girls.

They will not, obviously, support trans men and boys under initiatives to help females as TMAM and biology is irrelevant.

How will they know which are which given internal feelings tell you your gender?

They are in danger of not helping some girls who present as boys and have male biology.
They will put resources earmarked for girls to males who has happen to have female biology.

How will they guard against this???

If this is really the line they're taking, and or certainly seems to be, then no fucking way would I give them any money.

I can't believe they are throwing transboys to the wolves like this.

So if a female child says they feel like a boy, action aid consider them to be at no risk of FGM, not going to school because of periods etc

I mean that's logically what they are saying.

My conclusion is they don't mean that at all they're just very very very stupid.

Genderist beliefs are luxury beliefs, only the most privileged have time and resources to spend fretting about their identities and forcing other people to do the same when on a global level for so many it's their actual material reality that's the biggest concern. One would think that would be the focus for organisations such as Action Aid.

Completely agree, terryleather and I think your explanation of where it comes from is accurate. When critical thinking is discouraged, when a cultural theory is taught as absolute truth, this is the inevitable outcome.

Genderist beliefs are luxury beliefs, only the most privileged have time and resources to spend fretting about their identities and forcing other people to do the same when on a global level for so many it's their actual material reality that's the biggest concern.

Yes.

It's the crassness of the Deptford Women's Project all over again. It's quite offensive superimposing these very first world privileged issues over the top of people who lack the luxury of time, capacity or living long enough to worry about things like their authentic self and pronouns. And in places where any male or female trying to opt out of their fate by biology everyone is perfectly well aware of and hasn't the indulgence to linguistically and sociologically deconstruct away, is going to be laughed at if lucky, or risk being killed. Which is why these charities exist in the first place. It's madness.

If you can physically change your appearance/'presentation' (in modern parlance) by the changing of clothes/haircut then your situation just cannot be placed alongside children being abused/mutilated/sold off on the basis of their sex. How can they not even register this?

A girl is at real risk living in some parts of the worlds (some more than others) from before birth up to puberty (and beyond). Little boy bodies have different risks - gender not being the most obvious. Sex and sexuality maybe.

@GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman Yep - we're mvumischooltrust.org.uk/ - our chair of the trustees is a former headmaster of the school and all of us (except me, I'm the newest trustee and not on the website yet - was supposed to go in August) have been out volunteering and we know exactly what the conditions are like on the ground, particularly the barriers to access to education for our female and visually-impaired students. For instance, we found is that for families to allow their daughters to attend on bursaries, a school representative has to visit their families a couple of times to convince the family. No such convincing needed for sons.

All donations and sponsorship very, very gratefully received!!

Shockingly illogical. I have also emailed them for clarification, including asking how they define who is at risk from FGM, forced marriage, infanticide, etc, and whether their mission also includes helping trans boys and men, or whether they are being intentionally excluded (and why).

Am currently looking through the finances of the fistula charity. Its American so I'm guessing at some terms like grants. I don't know if this means grants given to the charity to then spend, or grants the charity has given out to people who need it. If anyone knows please tell. Because it makes a huge difference in the telling of the accounts. Less important but I'm nosy, donor funds with restrictions and donor without restrictions. What does this mean?

XiaoXiong many thanks!

Donor with restrictions means it's been given for a specific purpose and the money has to be used for that purpose (generally not to be used for admin/fundraising expenses). Donor without restrictions means the charity can use it any way it wants.

The grants payable are under "liabilities" so I think that means those are grants the Fistula Foundation are giving out to projects they support.

Got a reply. Didn't say any thing. Yada yada trans yada yada inclusive.
I cancelled my standing order.

[quote Xiaoxiong]@GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman Yep - we're mvumischooltrust.org.uk/ - our chair of the trustees is a former headmaster of the school and all of us (except me, I'm the newest trustee and not on the website yet - was supposed to go in August) have been out volunteering and we know exactly what the conditions are like on the ground, particularly the barriers to access to education for our female and visually-impaired students. For instance, we found is that for families to allow their daughters to attend on bursaries, a school representative has to visit their families a couple of times to convince the family. No such convincing needed for sons.

All donations and sponsorship very, very gratefully received!![/quote]
Thank you so much. This is brilliant.

Xiaoxiong cheers. Am making headway but life is getting in the way too. From a first look, it seems legit, they spend more on the actual purpose of the charity than wages and swanky offices. They invest mostly wisely. And appear to only treat women. Over the years they have raised more and more money, as of dec 31 2019 they had 2 million in the bank, same date 2018 there was not quite a million. But the two years had broadly similar accounts.
They spend about 9 million per year on the actual treating of and associated training of drs and building hospitals and providing ambulances etc
They have an endowment of 8 and a bit million, they can spend 5% of that yearly.
Have not found a statement saying they treat solely women but they make big noise about it on the main pages. So if someone wants to email them feel free.

I'm reading this open mouthed. Including the live aid stuff. I knew there were some problems, but I had absolutely no idea of the profound mismanagement of the entire thing

I think one of the purposes of charities to provide to people overseas is to project the idea that the home country is wonderful and our suffering is miniscule compared to the suffering in other countries.

Thousands of UK children have been admitted to hospital with malnutrition this year. 3 women a week are being killed by domestic violence.

I have seen charities promote their cause using photos of beautiful healthy African children as if the very fact that they are African should make them the object of our pity.

Thank you for a brilliant thread.

Without mumsnet would ANY of this be discussed and brought to light?

I was called by a journalist yesterday who said they were going to run a story. Now nothing. Why? This is hugely important. Why are so many people apparently unable to see what is happening in plain sight?

Unbelievable, they don't seem to have the first idea. The examples of girls in developing countries who 'identify' as male only do so for their safety and for practical support for their families. So that they can, get an education, work to support the family, act as chaperones for the women in their families etc. Nothing to do with gender confusion.

It has nothing to do with 'identity' its survival. Is there a problem with decision makers in charitable causes not having a connection with the people they're supposed to be supporting? It just sounds so much like very sheltered people who've gone from school to uni to high management levels without having any real life experience playing at 'white saviour' without understanding their duty.

@DianasLasso

The only instance I can think of girls 'identifying as boys' is in Afghanistan but unsuprisingly that ends when reality bites.

Also sworn virgins in Albania.

But both phenomena driven by the same thing - societal misogyny.

(Whereas I think "third sexes" involving biological men are on the whole driven by societal homophobia.)

I agree, in both instances it seems to be a more practical thing agreed by the family to protect the daughter from extreme patriarchal expectations rather than an innate gender identity.

asked for clarification and they responed with a general email which didnt answer my question:

"Thank you for your valued feedback.......ActionAid UK supports the most marginalised women and girls in the world. When we talk about women and girls, we include trans women and girls. We are committed to trans inclusion and serious about our commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion........If you do decide to bring your sponsorship of xxxxx to a close, we kindly ask that you inform us so we can amend our records for you."

My response:
^Hi, this does not answer my question at all.

Your response suggests that my question was related to the exclusion of trans people from your support, which it was not at all.

To say sex doesnt exist erases trans people's experiences of transitioning and living with dysphoria.

Please answer my question 'does Action Aid believe that biological sex does not exist'.^

I don't hope for any clear answer which means I will have to withdraw my support. So sad. I am finding this terrifying now.

[Post edited by MNHQ at poster's request]

CrazyToast, in my email today I e asked for comprehensive answers to my questions. I will report back if they attempt to fob me off with inclusivity blurb. Which I expect they will.

There's something in The Telegraph but I'm not a subscriber so can't read it.

Telegraph article:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/17/action-aid-embroiled-trans-row-declaring-no-thing-biological/

They’ve put out a wishy washy statement on trans inclusion on their twitter. What a joke