Green Party proposed conference motion WDI

[BoyGirlDogCatMouseCheez]

I saw this on Green Feminists on Facebook and, well, blimey! On top of Shahrar Ali and Emma Bateman's recent (and long term) treatment it seems a big purge is being touted.

"Sign the Women's Declaration International declaration on sex-based rights for women and you may run the risk of being thrown out of the Green Party.

Green Feminists who are also members of the Green Party of England and Wales need to be aware of the late motion being brought by Ani Stafford-Townsend co-chair of the Green Party Women committee which is given below:

Late Motion: Developing an intersectional approach to diversity in the Green Party

Synopsis:

GPEW accepts the damning results of the 25th January 2022 Council of Europe report “Combating rising hate against LGBTI people in Europe”. GPEW accepts that it has been subject to hard-line anti-trans activism for some time; issues cannot be tackled without understanding; and oppression of marginalised groups intersect.

Motion:

Insert into Record of Policy Statements:

RR539:

The Green Party recognises the need for civil, open dialogue between party members on the topic of Trans Rights, in order to enable the party to make the most informed policy decisions possible.

The Green Party accepts that the “Gender Critical” movements in most UK political parties have been infiltrated by hard-line extremists, who advocate for the wholesale removal of virtually all trans rights as currently enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, and routinely share platforms with those who advocate for extremist positions such as the mass sterilization of trans people. These extremists have also been linked with attacks on women’s abortion rights, misinformation designed to provoke hatred towards trans people, and have benefitted from funding from the far-right.

The Green Party condemns hard-line anti-trans activists, including signatories of the “Women’s Declaration International”, which calls for the following:

A total ban on all trans women from entering any and all women’s spaces, including toilets, changing rooms, etc.

A ban on all internationally recommended trans healthcare of any kind on under 18s.

A ban on organisations that recognise Gender Identity (including policy that merely accepts the use of preferred pronouns) from having any involvement in children’s healthcare.

Legally protect the right to misgender trans women.

Ban trans women from being legally recognised as mothers, and trans men form being legally recognised as fathers.

Ban scientific research into fertility treatment for trans women.

Ban all trans women from misogyny combating measures, such as all women shortlists, scholarships, etc.

Ban all trans women and girls from women’s sports at all levels of competition, irrespective of the wishes of the organising sporting bodies.

Ban all trans women from women’s prisons.

Require all collected statistics to refer to trans women as male, and trans men as female.

Legally protect parents who seek to deny healthcare or therapy to transgender children.

The Green Party recognises that while many moderate gender critical party members may wish to discuss or debate some of the WDI demands, that collectively they represent a hard-line extremist view, involving what would be some of the most extreme anti-trans legislation in any country in Europe. The Green Party expresses regret that the Council of Europe report deems the UK as being on par with Russia, Poland and Hungary when it comes to LGBTI rights, and wishes to oppose any further worsening of our position.

Conference instructs :

Conference instructs GPRC to suspend signatories of the WHRC/Women’s Declaration International.

Conference instructs GPEx to provide intersectional equalities & diversity training to elected members, internally & externally, and to local party officers, in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of how the challenges to the rights of all marginalised groups intersect.

Insert into the Code of Conduct:

10.11:

Members should under no circumstances sign or have signed public declarations calling for the explicit removal of LGBTQIA+ rights, as enshrined in the Equality Act 2010 (under “gender Identity” and “sexual orientation”), in particular the WHRC declaration/Women’s Declaration International. Those members who do or have done so should be suspended from the party permanently."

I've seen this is often the case though. And famously the Green Party lumped all women and trans people into a "non men" category in the past.

Jarnsaxa and BoyGirlDogCatMouseCheez these are very good points.

I've felt the same when a previous GPW co chair was waxing lyrical on twitter about sparkly nail polish. Micro plastics? Ffs.

But this is absolutely much more of an issue. Not only is it wasted time and medical resources, the impact on the baby of the additional drugs and hormones etc is highly unethical. And surely with regards to womb transplants, women do take priority. I don't know enough about the science to take a view on that though.

There is actually a huge rise in the number of younger people choosing not to have children for financial and eco reasons. Birth rates have fallen below 2. This obsession with pregnancy for some trans women including if they're within the greens, illustrates how exceptionally self centred the ideology is.

@DomesticatedZombie

It's called 'Green Party Women'. If someone has identified out of womanhood then seems a bit odd they'd want to be part of a woman's group.

It's a carefully planned strategy designed to turf the terfs out.

The irony is that most of the women I know who are female centred feminists are all members of the greens!

WDI statement:

www.womensdeclaration.com/en/resources/press-releases/wdi-asks-green-party-to-uphold-members-rights-to-freedom-of-thought-and-expression/

I know shahrah and have no idea why he sticks with the Green Party. They spend more time squabbling than doing anything to protect animals and the environment.

The first six lines hold four people who have signed and declared themselves members of The Green Party.

Protests?

What actually is the point of the Greens?

Thanks for the translation, ScrollingLeaves. What a pack of lies. And at a time when we need a genuine green party like never before.

Absolutely captured… their treatment of Emma is disgusting.. cancelled membership

I only joined the English greens last year so I could vote!
In the words of The Clash, Should I Stay or Should I Go?
I’m thinking GO!

I'll stay till I'm kicked out.

So the motion synopsis sites the recent report by the Council of Europe which makes the spurious claim that the UK is on a par with Hungary, Poland and Turkey for LGBT equality and is home to vigilant attacks on their rights.
Here is Sarah Phillimore's brilliant response to counter its gaslighting...
sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/protecting-womens-rights-is-not-bigotry?r=azaia&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct

Virilant not vigilant

Ahhhh, new phone, autocorrect is killing me ! Virulent

Please sign it if you agree

Thank you xx

@DomesticatedZombie

BTW. Ani Stafford Townsend is not a woman. They are a female non binary person. It is very important to maintain civil, open dialogue during an authoritarian purge.

If they is not a woman, then why is they co-chair of 'Green Party Women'?

Because the gender variants like to base everything on gender identity when that is convenient and on sex when that is convenient.

And they get to stand for whatever they want - the current male rep for London stood last year for the female position - because he is non binary of course.

@Rhannion

I only joined the English greens last year so I could vote! In the words of The Clash, Should I Stay or Should I Go? I’m thinking GO!

Please stay! We need people to vote down lunatic motions like this. The TRAs don't have nearly as much support as they claim.

I thought it was Mermaids and the Tavistock Clinic who were the ones "advocating for the mass sterilization of transpeople"

The “successful male pregnancy” in rats announced recently in China is absolutely horrific. But it gives credence to the “of course men are going to be able to have babies” claim.
This is how they did it: castrate a male rat. Attach him to a female rat. Both of them immobilised. He is drained of blood & attached to her circulation so that her heart, liver & kidneys support him & her endocrine system feeds him.
Kill a female rat, remover her uterus & implant it into the male.
Immobilise a third female rat, drug her to stimulate ovulation, harvest her ova. Fertilise them in vitro. Implant fertilised ova in the uteruses of both the male rat & the female who is his life support system. If the pregnancies take, they develop in tandem. The female’s hormones circulate in the body of the attached male - the parabiont.
When the pregnancy has reached term, the pups are surgically removed from the male (I don’t know about the female’s pups.
The “successful” was 3.68% of pups alive at 1 day from delivery. That has been reported as a total of 10 pups.
I don’t know how many male rats were used but an average rat pregnancy is 5-12 pups. I’d guess they went to the lower end, so I’m estimating 50 male rats & 150 female ones. But I don’t know how many failures there were before the implant stage.

There is no way any ethics committee would approve this - even in rats.

It's horrible.

I suspect some men would not have a problem with it though since they see women as things for their use only and deny us our basic humanity - especially if women 'consent' (dead women donating ova and organs and living women desperately needing the money 'consenting' to do the other roles).

@nauticant

My traditional cut and paste of what I wrote before about womb "transplants":

I'll write what I always write when this comes up. This business of uterine "transplants" into men appears to be about science but it is not. It's about getting the idea out there that men can give birth too, but not just yet, there are a few technical details to be sorted out first. So while we're waiting for the inevitable, let's get on with the social sciences side of things and accept that since men can give birth too (not yet, but soon, soon, it's bound to happen), then there are no real differences between men and women in terms of things that are material and significant, they're just bodies with an interchangable set of parts. The actual differences are surface ones like the chosen forms of appearance.

It is about trying to change how people think by assuming a medical horror is a run-of-the-mill thing just round the corner. It's Overton Window stuff, not science.

Thanks for this. Makes sense.

We had this argument on a thread earlier this year where a poster insisted we were all delusional and that most definitely males were going to be having pregnancies within a few years.

That posted could not accept that at the moment embryos created for stem cells were destroyed by 14 days. And they were looking at maybe expanding this to a slightly longer period.

When it was pointed out that without all the supporting systems a female has that this ‘experiment’ of male pregnancy was in fact, a human baby grown in a bag (like the lamb experiments) they were greatly offended. But they simply could not understand that no ethics committee in the world for any foreseeable future would allow that degree of experimentation on a human embryo.

But they doubled down again and again… so it is happening…. Within a few years if I remember.

This is the harm being spread by this. Some males will genuinely believe this is possible.

I have no idea if these tra greens support womb transplants but they're part of a movement that seems to support unnecessary experimentation on animals and children.