Janice Turner on Rise Brighton and refuges for women

[TheFleegleHasLanded]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9c3909d4-787d-11eb-80c3-8cc375faed89?shareToken=9c2eda5c5c29ca1866884694ca1174ce

She just gets it, every time.

Whilst Stonewall maintains this 'annihilation' of women, they alienate the very people who would be willing to give massive support to transpeople and their needs. Women are more likely to be sympathetic to such causes but if pushed too hard, there is a backlash. Stonewall really don't understand women methinks and nor have they worked out that we, us, are where the real support would come from. Parking their tanks on our lawn was not a good move

Public bodies and local authorities heavily lobbied by Stonewall, which campaigns to abolish single-sex spaces, have adopted its equality criteria. Thus a refuge will lose marks in a tendering bid for prioritising women’s needs

prioritising women brings a black mark in stonewall world

nothing must prioritise women eh? not even a service were 91% of the people who need it are women

was there ever a more stark demonstration of stonewall's gross sexism?

Some of the comments in that article are chilling. Who are these people?

Some good ones too though. "I hope all the women reading this will take heart from the large number of supportive comments offered by decent men."

a 2nd times article - don't have a share link
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/womens-abuse-charity-lost-council-contracts-for-excluding-men-h6jfgzqd3

Here you go

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d360fb9a-7861-11eb-80c3-8cc375faed89?shareToken=9e2d4b281ecc2e904fee1ae37d6cc669

@WildishBambino

Those whose idea of activism is hashtags and Twitter pile-ons don’t build their own services. They only smash things down.

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

Organisations like Stonewall could fund a trans-only refuge tomorrow. They have the money, they have the cachet, the access to donors, the ability to buy expertise. Everything.

They don't want to create a trans service. They want to smash women's services.

I had never made this connection, thank you. They could and they don't.

Every time I wonder if I am being paranoid or unreasonable about how much this movement hates women, there's a breathtaking reminder.

They want to smash women's services

There are a handful of activists on Twitter who've made a point of taking a photo and crowing every time they pull down a Vancouver Rape Relief posters or flier. The weird thing is that all the ones doing it seem to be female and appear very pleased with themselves. I don't know wtf they're thinking.

The weird thing is that all the ones doing it seem to be female and appear very pleased with themselves. I don't know wtf they're thinking.

I think of Sheila Jeffreys' sex castes.

Handmaids who perceive themselves protected by their socioeconomic standing within the sex castes and never likely to be in need of such services
or
Handmaids who are hoping to gain status by alliance to rescue them from their place in the sex castes (but it won't work, because nothing is ever enough and their allyship and support is regarded as the entitlement of another group and not status-sharing).

Discussion of Jeffreys' book (other material no longer available so it's fortunate this is still up via the archive service):

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20140410170437/gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/exclusive-preview-gender-hurts-by-sheila-jeffreys/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20140410170437/gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/exclusive-preview-gender-hurts-by-sheila-jeffreys/

I see our friend Disgusted of a certain northern town has put their tenpen'orth in... and been dismissed quite rightly!

But don't the chosen service providers have single sex refuge places but also have a place for gay men who are the victims of DV? The only difference between the two is that Rise did not cover all DV groups. The successful group do not put Women DV victims in with men DV victims... surely no one thought that?

Well it probably won't surprise anyone here but I think that's an appalling piece. Firstly the concept of luxury beliefs, whilst it has some truth, is a right wing idea intended to undermine the demands of people of colour and the working class . The reason it has some truth is that it's a luxury belief to think that the war on drugs has had a positive impact on poor communities, or that the police are not a racist institution. It completely undermines the demands and experiences of the tens if not hundreds of thousands of working class black people who came out onto the streets in support of Black Lives Matter. But that's perhaps what you'd expect in a right wing newspaper that seeks to undermine any grassroots demands.

The closure of these services, in particular RISE, is a disaster for trans people along with all the other women who sued their services. RISE are an explicitly trans welcoming services in an area with a disproportionate number of trans people. Monklands Women's Aid are also trans inclusive. Trans people will be harmed by these decisions.

To attempt to blame this on trans peole is disgusting. As anyone who how followed funding patterns in the VAWG sector would know, there has been growing pressure to make services gender neutral - not to include trans people (who in most cases were already included) but to include male identified men - and this push has not come from trans people but from men's organisations. Women's Aid and others have spoken of this worrying trend more than once. This is why these services have lost funding.

A second factor which Turner conveniently ignores is that this is the result of marketisation of public services and the resulting contract culture which has plunged services into desperate insecurity for over two decades as well as lingering austerity. If there is a need for mens services, and there may well be, there should be funding introduced in addition to successful ongoing services, rather than smashing up existing provision with a re-tendering exercise no doubt designed to try and do it all on the cheap. And in my experience the results of these tendering rounds, which make everyone terrified because often their own salary is on the line, are frequently far more to do with corruption and nepotism than ideology. Often, although thankfully not in this case, they are used to bring private sector sharks into the market.

To completely ignore these factors and instead blame trans people based on something that is largely happening in Canada, not here, is not just deplorable but deeply damaging to the very services she claims to support. This is not the story they want told, these decisons have nothing to do with trans people and will harm trans people along with the many women and LGB people also affected. All it serves to do is distract people from what's really happened and plunge them against their will into the centre of a controversey they really don't need at the moment. If people genuinely want to help then instead of sharing this article and weaponising the loss of these services as part of on ongoing culture war then go to the twitter feeds of RISE and Monklands, donate to the crowdfunders, sign petitions etc and take your cue from them not the right wing press who are no supporters of funding women's services properly.

@jj1968 I don't think it can possibly be argued that Janice Turner is right wing or not a supporter of women. Nor do I hear her blaming transpeople. Unfortunately, what has happened to Rise, is an outcome of the "no debate" mantra, which disallows proper consideration and consultation around these issues. The blunt approach leads those who don't care but who have power, to give what they think will resolve an issue - "gender neutral, there you go - everyone is happy"!! This is why we need to be able to discuss properly in public and for all voices to be able to be heard.

I would be only too relieved if anybody who needed a refuge from DV or IPV had the combination of a physical space and appropriate support services that they need. I should think that there is sufficient money to provide adequately niche services to address the need of so many demographics rather than the current ghastly competition (9 families for every refuge space) that is a mute testimony to how many underserved people there are in this arena.

But is is luxury beliefs jj, privileged, misogynist men making decisions, which have no consequence for them personally, just to virtue signal and make women suffer.
Now you're upset because they've made trans people collateral damage too? Welcome to the fucking club. Go whine at Stonewall. They caused this

whatsnewpussycat you certainly have something there and I would add that the transagenda has put women in a position where they know they have to sort out their own rights before looking at someone else's. No point in chucking the blame at women. Take our language, take our space, we sometimes start hurling shit. If we feel threatened we will react, anyone who thinks we are a passive sex, is using our stereotype as fact......that would be a very silly supposition

@highame - hear hear to that!!

I know because it is mumsnet every body wants to hang everything on the trans issue. But in fact here it is a side show.

the defuning of of women only projects began decades ago.

Please know your history.

This started almost from the time WLM established the need for women only services.

This is why these dry excercises in procurement do not place any value on women only because as a concept it never ever became part of political thought.

Do any of you know, have you ever checked whether there used to be local refuge in your area and it got defunded or taken over by a Housing Association or hostel provider.

So whilst this article is good, it is historically inaccurate.

It is because the concept of women only never took root in the establishment ie men, that the trans narrative of sex is irrelevant took hold so easily in the main stream.

So the whole sale undermining of women groups and services has been happening around us all for decades.

I was part of a women's group that lost funding in the late 80s because we were told the concept of women only was redundant.

I am as gender critical as anyone. But also, if you dont know your history you dont learn from it. And it you dont learn from it you repeat the same mistakes and / or under estimate your enemy.

It is just about trans. It is about the patriarchy, and men's disrespect for women as having any value or having opinions and ideas of any value.

sorry type as in hurry!

Not "it is just about trans" but:

It is NOT just about trans (it is about men)

I don't think anyone is blaming trans people for this. However, I think there is little doubt that part of the reason that this is happening is due to an increasing climate of dismissal of the reality of the women's experiences and lives, and of the need for specialist services. Trans activists have certainly stoked that fire.

She is very astute.

She's brilliant. Nails it every time.

@JustTurtlesAllTheWayDown

I don't think anyone is blaming trans people for this. However, I think there is little doubt that part of the reason that this is happening is due to an increasing climate of dismissal of the reality of the women's experiences and lives, and of the need for specialist services. Trans activists have certainly stoked that fire.

This. Maybe this time the transpeople affected by this will realise that the transactivists they’ve been winking at is not about them but is simply a flagship for men’s rights. spoiler: they won’t

Transactivism, not transactivists.

JustTurtles - I think the level of cuts is probably similar to previous years. Its a sad fact that the trans issues has made more aware of what has been the steady erosion of women's services.

Although I think (without knowing the actual amounts) the cut to 3 refuges in one area is probably a horrible record.