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.

@Broomfondle

I'm really saddened. I have literally just got back from posting a donation to Actionaid to supply young women in refugee camps with menstrual products and was chuffed because the appeal I received asking me to specifically mentioned women and girls and the effects of their biology. Its like the sand is shifting underneath us as we try and stay upright. In between me receiving the appeal and posting it back they've just denied women's reality. I campaigned for Amnesty for years and their 'rapists gonna rape' shrug at concerns regarding the loss of female sex spaces still hurts. This hurts too. I care about women and girls. They're the one's losing out from this shit. I hope I can find another way to help those girls in poor conditions bleeding from their vaginas.

It's worth waiting for clarification, I think. It could be someone in their comms team exceeding their authority. We can hope, at least.

I have no issue with Action Aid supporting trans people. I absolutely believe that everyone in the LGBT plus plus alphabet are at the sharp end of bigotry and prejudice, and it is wholly legitimate for an aid agency to seek to redress that. That's light years from saying there is no difference between women and trans women, and that women have no need of single sex provision at all - let alone that biology doesn't exist.

As has been pointed out, if biology didn't exist, nor would Action Aid need to.

It's a central tenet of aid work that countries that empower women have hugely better outcomes across pretty well all measures, and that women are oppressed because of reproductive biology. Hence the focus on empowering them - not just because we are more marginalised, globally. Action Aid is meant to counter that biologically-based oppression, not reinforce it by denying it exists.

Again, I'm hoping senior management clarifies this in a saner, more reality-centred manner.

Lost for words. Then I found some words and sent the following email to them at the email address mentioned above:

I am writing about an image on Twitter which includes a screenshot of a statement reportedly made by ActionAidUK, in which you state that you consider that there is 'no such thing as a biologically male/female body'. Could you please clarify what you mean by this statement,and what itmeans for Action Aid's work in protecting the rights of women and girls, both the UK and overseas?

For example, are you now saying that women and girls who suffer FGM do so because of their gender, and not their sex? In that case, is it possible for these women and girls to escape mutilation by choosing a male gender identity, instead of a female one?
On your website, you state that no girl, anywhere, should be subjected to this dangerous and damaging procedure.Am I correct in thinking that you have evidence that biological male children who idetifyas girls are at equal risk of FGM?

I eagerly await your response.

gah, a couple of typos in there! Never mind.

Not to mention how offensive it is to impose this first world problem wankery, possible for only highly privileged people in countries where they have the money, time, services and self indulgence for all this, onto the people they claim to care about. Who are being raped, aborted, made brides and pregnant and dying in childbirth, subjected to control and mutilation of their sexuality for 'purity' reasons - and cannot identify out of it.

The overprivileged narcissistic and down right colonialist superiority of it all is repulsive.

@cheeseismydownfall

Lost for words. Then I found some words and sent the following email to them at the email address mentioned above:

I am writing about an image on Twitter which includes a screenshot of a statement reportedly made by ActionAidUK, in which you state that you consider that there is 'no such thing as a biologically male/female body'. Could you please clarify what you mean by this statement,and what itmeans for Action Aid's work in protecting the rights of women and girls, both the UK and overseas?

For example, are you now saying that women and girls who suffer FGM do so because of their gender, and not their sex? In that case, is it possible for these women and girls to escape mutilation by choosing a male gender identity, instead of a female one?
On your website, you state that no girl, anywhere, should be subjected to this dangerous and damaging procedure.Am I correct in thinking that you have evidence that biological male children who idetifyas girls are at equal risk of FGM?

I eagerly await your response.

Brilliant. I love it when people write things that simplify it all down to its basic crapness. And you've done that.

Methinks girls and boys in the developing world have too much to worry about to be thinking about identifying as things they are not....

Cross post with Michelle, who put it very eloquently.

Who do we give to instead of Action Aid?

Plan International? Christian Aid? (Who, despite the name, don't push Christianity as part of their work - my staunchly and vocally atheist ex used to give to Christian Aid . I was the Action Aid supporter in the household.)

Recommendations for charities who know that FGM, sex-selective abortion, infanticide, child marriage, denial of abortion rights happen because of sex not gender feelz.

Well this a bit of a leap after its new CEO Girish Menon said last November that the organisation had ‘unapologetically adopted feminist principles’ What fecking feminist principles are those that deny the existence of biological females?

www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/actionaid-s-uk-ceo-explains-how-the-charity-has-unapologetically-adopted-feminist-principles.html

Wait a minute, this is an unlawful statement.

Action Aid are denying the protected characteristic of sex by saying there is no such thing as a biologically female body. Ergo, they are stating that they will not adhere to the Equality Act 2010.

The Equality Act is law. Its definitions are law.

Action Aid have made a statement that says they will not conform to the law. They cannot do this; it's illegal.

Cheese, could I use your email?
I have been a regular donor to Action Aid since soon after I got my first proper job back in the Dark Ages (which are starting look quite enlightened compared to some of the bollocks we're supposed to swallow now). They've had a fair few grand out of me over the years.

If they support that Twitter shot, the direct debit will be cancelled. And some sane charity will get the £££ instead.

I actually came onto FWR to ask about Ed Davey vs Layla Moran in the LibDem leadership contest...

Packingsoapandwater You beat me to it by minutes.

This is disgusting but unsurprising.

@TornadoOfSouls

I just rang them up - I wanted to confirm that this was real (!) I spoke to a very polite, helpful person who by her voice I’m pretty sure was a trans woman. She confirmed that this will be up on their website soon. She encouraged me to email [email protected]

I can see that a charity like this will need to work with men, boys & transgender men and women as part of their work. But can’t they do it without saying biological sex doesn’t exist? I feel like crying. Their stuff about period poverty is so good ... how can they do this?

This is a charity dedicated to the plight of girls in Africa - their plight occurring by very virtue of the fact that they are female? The world has gone fucking nuts. I've stopped my direct debit, and will tell them of my utter disgust at this lunacy

@Datun thank you

@GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman, of course! Although if you do, I'd change the last sentence to read

Am I correct in thinking that you have evidence that self identifying girls with penises are at equal risk of FGM?

Because I originally said biological male children, who of course don't exist now

I hope this isn't real.

If it is then AAAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is getting bloody ridiculous now. What the fuck to they mean when they say there is no such thing as biological sex? Utter tossers.

I did have a look at the plan international website

I didn’t spot anything...but could obviously have missed something

Wait a minute, this is an unlawful statement.

What action to take, suggestions please

Really looking forward to Movember coming out with a statement that there's no such thing as 'biological males'. I'm sure that would go down a treat.

This is hugely frustrating

When a charity addressing such extreme need world wide has enough time and manpower to existentially deconstruct womanhood and turn half the human race into a thought experiment.... you start to feel they have far too many people sitting in offices who have far too little real work to do, and to wonder where the bloody hell people's money is going.

I think this is a clever way of solving the problem of period poverty ! Obviously if there are no biological female bodies then periods cannot exists !
Viola ! Problem solved !
I can't imagine why no one thought of it before!

This is massively disappointing if true. I've supported them precisely because of the work they do with women and girls in the 3rd world. I've asked for clarification before I stop my standing order.

@Packingsoapandwater

Wait a minute, this is an unlawful statement.

Action Aid are denying the protected characteristic of sex by saying there is no such thing as a biologically female body. Ergo, they are stating that they will not adhere to the Equality Act 2010.

The Equality Act is law. Its definitions are law.

Action Aid have made a statement that says they will not conform to the law. They cannot do this; it's illegal.

Exactly! This is quite a spectacular statement from an aid charity. More than your average gender bollocks - I can't see a way anyone could argue this without being a paid-up biology non-believer.

@highame

Wait a minute, this is an unlawful statement.

What action to take, suggestions please

I don't know. I'm pretty shocked at the moment, and I'm not entirely sure what the real world implications are yet.

But they are refuting a legal definition on which a substantial amount of legislation rests, so they then cannot, by their own declaration, conform to that legislation. They are declaring that they will not conform to UK law.

I suppose the first step would be to ensure they are actually bound to UK law. If they are, then I suppose a second step would be to write to their legal team asking for clarification. And then take it from there.

I'm quite flabbergasted at the lack of oversight here. It's like posting a sticker on your forehead saying "Sue us".