WEP membership support single sex spaces

[Imnobody4]

We are celebrating #IWD2022 by publishing our overview of @WEP_UK's member assembly on self-ID

WEP MEMBERSHIP OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT SINGLE-SEX SPACES

WE thank all the women who gave their time & expertise

@ManduReid @K_IngalaSmith @janeclarejones

t.co/NNCDO1JFFK
The report is here
www.wepsbr.com/post/wep-members-support-single-sex-spaces

It also highlights the machinations of WEP officers.

This is a resounding win for women and our sex-based rights. These findings are particulary significant when understood in context. This was not a member-wide consultation, but a process of discussion with WEP selected members with a balance of views:

At the start of the process 40% were pro self-ID, 40% were anti self-ID and 20% were undecided.

This shows there was a significant shift from a pro-self ID position to an anti self-ID position when it comes to single sex spaces and single-sex exceptions as outlined in the Equality Act 2010. In fact, half of those described as 'undecided' or 'pro self-ID' shifted their position to an anti self-ID position after listening to the expert evidence.

This is BIG news, and shows that our Party is not in deadlock, we are not polarised and there is a way forward. So why has the Women's Equality Party not platformed these results and spoken up for women? Why, when our VAWG policy advocates for single sex exceptions, and our membership support single-sex exceptions is our Party unable to advocate for our sex-based rights?

Well, crikey.

It's almost as if women who join a Women's Equality Party are quite keen on actual women's rights.

I'm shooken, I tell ye.

@teawamutu

It's almost as if women who join a Women's Equality Party are quite keen on actual women's rights.

I'm shooken, I tell ye.

It is indeed, surprising.

Wow. Fascinating results. And so frustrating that WEP haven't publicised them or used them to justify taking a position.

The process sounds super-interesting - clearly supporting the idea that when people do engage fully with the issues and understand what's being proposed, they're much more likely to oppose self ID.

Imagine it would've been a much higher % if loads of us hadn't left!

Shock horror - women supporting women!

It seems as though the leadership did everything in its powers to first prevent having a consultation, then tried to skew it so the consultation would only give the result it wanted, then when that failed tried to cover it up

... and still, after all that, 71% clearly support single sex spaces.

If the WEP doesn't change its position after this I can see no point in it continuing. Who would support a party that goes directly against the wishes of 2/3 of its members?

@McDuffy

Imagine it would've been a much higher % if loads of us hadn't left!

That's a good point. Be interesting to see membership stats.

I don't understand the mentality of the people who set up the WEP. If you believe women need their own party then surely you believe that is because of the problems women face due to being women ie sex based differences. Them ignoring that and it being a party for people with a feminine gender identity just seemed nuts. There are a lot of men I have more in common with from a political point of view than many women. If I was going to join a political party for women that presumably spanned the political divisions it would be because they were focussing on issues females face. I find it all very odd. This could have been their decade with women abandoning other parties

So was this set-up a direct result of WEP’s policies? Small parties can often easily be manipulated by small numbers of manipulators/infiltrators, but this process has an interesting premise. Also, very telling that when ordinary women actually listen to the arguments properly, only a few are resistant to changing their thoughts on this. A limited number have absolutely closed minds, but I think they’re relatively rare. Even professional politicians who have to stick to the party line are becoming increasingly uncomfortable as they waffle their incoherent policies.

Oh this is interesting news indeed. I left WEP precisely because there had been no consultation with members about single sex spaces. Like Rebecca I couldn't get my head around it.

I don't understand the mentality of the people who set up the WEP. If you believe women need their own party then surely you believe that is because of the problems women face due to being women ie sex based differences.

Similar to the green party, stonewall these days and many other groups- for some activism becomes an end in itself because it brings attention and a sense of accomplishment more easily than real achievement. There is then a huge motivation to ignore conflicting information.

I'm sure the Owen Jones', Ash Sarkars and Nancy Kellys of the world believe they are doing the right thing but their choices are filtered by self interest and ignorance.

So they spent all that time fudging and fluffing and basically alienating all the support that could have got them some real gains for....

An idea so unpopular even those who've weathered the wokism don't support. Perhaps the leadership might have a massive change of heart? If they do then it will be too late for most.

If anyone is interested, the thread I'm linking explores the evolution of the WEP and links to all their Mumsnet webchats.

The Big Lie - how the WEP was always about gender rather than sex www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4058470-the-big-lie-how-the-wep-was-always-about-gender-rather-than-sex

@2Rebecca

I don't understand the mentality of the people who set up the WEP. If you believe women need their own party then surely you believe that is because of the problems women face due to being women ie sex based differences. Them ignoring that and it being a party for people with a feminine gender identity just seemed nuts. There are a lot of men I have more in common with from a political point of view than many women. If I was going to join a political party for women that presumably spanned the political divisions it would be because they were focussing on issues females face. I find it all very odd. This could have been their decade with women abandoning other parties

Wasn't it set up way before 'gender' was even a thing? Remember back in the day when 'woman' meant 'woman' and nobody even imagined it could ever mean anything else?

Ah, sorry, Ereshkiga, I see your post.

Seems not! 2015. Quite recent.

Good god, Catherine Mayer.

' I don't believe secondary sex characteristics are a reliable determinant. People with XX chromosomes are sometimes born without vaginas but I suspect you would still be happy with them defining themselves as women. We are all on a series of spectrums.'

Are, we, aye?

'What is absolutely clear is that people who identify as female are a huge structural disadvantage to people who identify as men--that to be perceived as a woman is an enormous disadvantage.'

'Identifying as female' definitely does not equal 'being perceived as a woman'. In any universe.

I'm hoping that in the five years since that webchat some of the more extreme batshittery has been exposed for the nonsense it is?

Isn’t the man who is the primary financial donor for WEP these days a tech dude with a trans woman young adult child ?

Wasn't the WEP targeted in the early days by certain male born transactivists? That old tactic from the Denton's playbook - infiltration and appropriation from the outset.

@AlsoNotAGirl

Isn’t the man who is the primary financial donor for WEP these days a tech dude with a trans woman young adult child ?

Oh, really? Do you have any more details on this? I can't find the WEP donor list online.

@AlsoNotAGirl

Isn’t the man who is the primary financial donor for WEP these days a tech dude with a trans woman young adult child ?

That's the rumour.

As this site reported previously, one of the WEP’s biggest donors is a wealthy software engineer for Google with a trans-identified child. According to the electoral commission website, he donated £91,700 between 2015 and 2020. He was also given a role on the members assembly and was present in the feedback session at conference last year, where he described how painful it was for him to have to listen to ‘extreme views.’

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-wep-continues-to-betray-its-members?s=r

A poster on my linked thread suggests it is relatively easy to find out who he is:

Very easy to find the name of the man who has bought/is only donor for the Women’s’ Equality Party on the electoral commission site and his twitter account makes it very obvious that his interest in women’s rights is solely focused on trans rights. He tweeted out about ‘trans daughter’

The name that comes up a few times on the electoral commissions list of financial donors to wep is Jon Skeet. Note this list is publicly available information.

Oh, I see. So daddy bought his kid a women's political party so she could be just like all the other girls?

Fair enough.

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Oh, I see. So daddy bought his kid a women's political party so she could be just like all the other girls?

Fair enough.

I can't quite get over what comparatively tiny amounts of money were involved in purchasing the soul of WEP and their complicity in being part of the erasure of women as a sex class.