Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Action Aid - no such thing as a biological female

514 replies

Apileofballyhoo · 15/07/2020 16:48

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

Action Aid - no such thing as a biological female
OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
boatyardblues · 30/07/2020 08:04

“Stakeholder“ often seems to refer to the ‘monkey on your shoulder’ lobby groups who steer the charity towards objectives that suit the lobby group’s aims rather than those that best serve the target population for the charity. Rights holder is better because it centres the end user, but doesn’t really work where the end users need the help because they don’t have/hold rights. 🤷‍♂️

OhHolyJesus · 30/07/2020 08:57

The Facebook ad keeps coming up on my feed, so many comments questioning their language and then the same person coming on to say T*RF and cis. It's been useful to inform some who weren't aware. Some are completely stunned this is even a thing.

RedToothBrush · 30/07/2020 09:41

In approaching this in this way actionaid uk illustrate the problem perfectly. They are a charity more concerned about western issues and western politics than those in the developing world.

Ive said this time and again. Those who have least power have no voice. They are missing from conversations like this precisely because they have so little power. We should be looking for the voices that are completely absent rather than merely those who shout loudest.

In theory the biggest stakeholders and right holders for actionaid uk's work should be those they set out to help. Women in the developing world.

They are not. Talking about bloody stakeholders etc in this way just emphasises how fair removed actionaid uk are from their front line work and how much they are just about paid charity jobs in the uk.

Instead this nonsense will be western charities who sit at the table and talk about this and decide the philosophical definition of a woman and how actionaid should proceed rather than there being any consideration for this being a complete first world load of bollocks which has doesn't stop the abuse and deprivation of women in the reality of the developing world.

And those charities will spend time (and money) running their charity and their stakeholders (all the little charities they donate to) will spend time (and money) having a circle jerk meeting to declare how they have considered the definition of a woman, how they have received the advance of Stonewall and how they will implement their institutionalised sexism effectively in a completely tone deaf way. And they will smile, say 'look how good we are. Look what we did' and then give themselves a big pat on the back. We all know that the outcome of this has already been decided because they are not focused on women and girls in the developing world - they are focused on what a woman means in the uk and their lack of ability to recognise and understand the simple word 'sex' is part of the equality act with legal exemptions and that gender does not trump it.

The stakeholders meanwhile will continue to get the crumbs off the colonial table and be instructed as to the definition of a woman going forward and completely missing the point that in order to campaign to stop sexism and harm in the developing world you have to understand what it looks like in the first world too otherwise you are institutionally sexism and this harms your ability to do you fucking job properly.

If you cant see sex you cant see sexism.

This whole exercise should not be happening. This is not hard stuff to do. Yet no one running the charity is prepared to be a grown up, put their foot down and say 'we are a charity aimed at helping women and girls who face discrimination and harm on the basis of their sex in the developing world' because they are too fucking cowardly. They are too wrapped up in first world drivel about gender which has no meaning whatsoever to anyone they claim to serve and is the political baby of out of touch campaigners using the charity to further their aims over and above the ambition and purpose of the charity.

Once again, their reaction should make you sit up, pay attention and avoid like the plague because they dont give a shit about the issues they are campaigning against.

fatblackcatspaw · 30/07/2020 11:07

agree and also the orgainisations who actually DO THE WORK in these countries which are clients of Action Aid... who I'm sure do not get their hands dirty will have to waste time on this crap

who ever is briskly getting back at that annoying wokie on the Action Aid Facebook Ad THANK YOU! I'm so enraged I'm about to say something competely over the top on it.

fatblackcatspaw · 30/07/2020 11:09

RedToothBrush am so tempted to just copy your marvellous post straight into the body of the ruddy facebuik thread...

crunchermuncher · 30/07/2020 12:17

RedToothBrush nailed it. Very eloquent!

HijabiVenus · 30/07/2020 12:20

How has covid 19 affected those who are neither males or females ? It does not look like any have been affected. Perhaps that's the way to survive it.

RedToothBrush · 30/07/2020 13:08

There are shit loads of spelling mistakes and typos in that, but hey ho.

GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman · 30/07/2020 19:00

If you can't see sex, you can't see sexism
Nails it.

SerenityNowwwww · 31/07/2020 08:37

Here’s a puzzle. Spot the missing words in this article on cervical cancer (so nothing important or live saving):

www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/health/new-cervical-cancer-screening-recommendations-wellness/index.html

1WildTeaParty · 02/08/2020 12:54

To add to @SerentiyNowwwww 's puzzle:

Spot the INCLUDED word in an article from the same group (American Cancer Society)
From:
'KEY STATISTICS FOR TESTICULAR CANCER':

'This is largely a disease of young and middle-aged men, but about 6% of cases occur in children and teens, and about 8% occur in men over the age of 55.

Because testicular cancer usually can be treated successfully, a man's lifetime risk of dying from this cancer is very low'

1WildTeaParty · 02/08/2020 12:55

Sex still exists - but only the male kind.

1WildTeaParty · 02/08/2020 13:09

Referring to 'an individual with a cervix' (as in that American Cancer Society article) in does sound like a return to the days when hospital cases were always examples of a particular disease or offending organ rather than a patient with a name. This is not a step forwards American Cancer Society.

FlamingoAndJohn · 02/08/2020 13:19

So they use people with the cervix rather than woman but are happy to use man.
Is there anyone actually getting upset about the words women and men or is it just woke bros trying too hard?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread