The Women's Institute faces revolt ...

[ArabeIIaScott]

I know this was mentioned recently on here, and the letter shared, but I can't find the thread.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11982451/Womens-Institute-faces-revolt-policy-allowing-transgender-members-join.html

Well, now that Caroline Nokes and William Hague have told women to stop being so jolly horrible and to just be quiet and let the transwomen do what they want, I'm sure everything will settle down and be lovely again, and women can sit back and listen like good girls to all the new exciting stories from women with much more interesting histories than our boring old bog standard cunty ones.

https://twitter.com/timesradio/status/1648240070602936321?s=12

I read the article when it was in the WI members ‘ magazine some time ago. I was then an active member of the WI. ( I left because I moved house, not because of this controversy, although I haven’t joined any of my three local groups , and I don’t intend to until this is resolved)

It doesn’t say anywhere why Petra wanted to join the WI. There’s nothing about the ( many and varied) activities and meetings , nothing about the educational courses which were offered before lockdown, nothing about the very real charitable and caring work which groups do in their local towns and villages, nothing about the campaigns which the WI have initiated and supported about issues such as FGM ,maternal leave, or domestic violence refuges.

It’s all just about how great it is for Petra to be recognised as a woman. I presume it is nice for Petra’s spouse , who is very active and respected in the WI at local and National level, to have her spouse with her at meetings (though most members can bear to be separated from their partners for a few hours , just for a change) .

I hope this post is inoffensive. It reflects my experience as a member of the WI

It was deliberately rude and misogynist. It's how the WI is perceived and if it goes to court / media battles that's where the counter argument to single sex provision is going to be thrown at it...

The WI have to demonstrate they have a legitimate aim and purpose in being single sex that goes beyond simple companionship between biological women because the whole premise of the EA protected status for gender reassignment is about social acceptance and not being discriminated against. Women have to demonstrate a need based on biological disadvantage as to why an exemption would be appropriate, fair and proportionate.

very well said Esmacannonball

Cross dressing isn't a protected characteristic, so it is fine to discriminate against cross dressers.

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic, but people get very confused about how to apply the equality act to gender reassignment.

Correct application would mean that transmen have to be admitted to the WI but transwomen don't have to be. This is why the free masons don't throw out men who transition.

If two males perform the same amount and type of cross-dressing in their daily lives and one claims to be trans then that person is covered by the Protected Characteristic of Gender Reassignment.

If challenged they would only need to say, for example, that at some point in the future they propose to change the name on their gas bill to Tiffany.

Since the magical sex metamorphosis can start with nothing more than adopting stereotypical clothing and cosmetic appearance, just wearing nail varnish could be used as evidence that they are covered by the PC of Gender Reassignment - because they have started to "live as a woman" from the fingertips backwards.

As well as appearance, "Other attributes of sex" could mean, for example, "behaving like a woman", such as joining the WI, or "doing woman-things" such as other people calling you by female pronouns.

The whole thing is nonsensical.

EA2010 - Section 7 - Gender Reassignment

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7?timeline=false&view=plain

Kirstie Allsop would get on well with him.

So at what point does a cross dressing male become a Male with a trans identity? Why is one excluded from the WI but not the other? Would Pips Bunce be allowed in or not? What about gender fluid people?

Presumably depends on what day Pips wanted to access the WI? If it was a lady day, then fine. Not allowed on Man Days?

I wonder how keen TW would be to join the WI if it became a boring old mixed sex organisation? Or if their local branch became all TW?

I always remember what Datun says - it’s the women in the space that makes the space attractive to TW. Without the women, there’s no validation & it becomes meaningless.

So I am wondering …. will the WI now propose a change of name to the WATWI?

They could be the MWI.. men and wankers institute. Or the peoples institute. Or the people who may feel a boy womanly institute, or the people who believe in sexist stereotypes institute. If they’re letting men in, they’re not the womens institute any more are they….

Bit womanly ffs

How many of the agist sexist comments in here have been to a WI meeting?

It's not all jam and Jerusalem. It's a woman's campaining organisation, social group and local activists groups in one. The WI have helped champion some amazing campaigns like Keep Britain Tidy.

In my WI we discussed held self defence class, did pole dancing together, had a pelvic floor training session, fundraised for our local women's refuge. Talked about many issues intimately - babies, breastfeeding, period poverty, incontinence, woman's mental health crisis, ADHD and ASD in women, the suffragist movement.

We celebrated the women in our community, gave them a place to have a voice. Supported local female businesses and creators.

I'm sick to the back teeth, even in this forum about asking why we shouldn't just become mixed sex. We don't fucking want to and we don't fucking need to.

Bingo.

Amen to that.

No they don't. Schedule 16 does not even require a legitimate aim.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/16

From the explanatory notes:

This paragraph allows an association whose main purpose is to bring together people who share a particular characteristic (such as a particular nationality, sexual orientation or a particular disability) to continue to restrict membership to such people, and impose similar restrictions on those who can exercise the rights of an associate, or who can be invited as guests.

Having the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment does not mean you must be treated as the opposite sex.

If a Trans woman has a GRC certificate and is Female on their birth certificate, can they be excluded under current law?

@Blort you’re not on the Unofficial WI group on FB are you? Lots of posts supporting trans and someone this morning claiming the anti-trans movement is funded by extreme right wingers. Latest post with links claiming sex is not binary. I am in the WI, I’ve been in for about 13 years now since I was pregnant. I love meeting a wide range of women and learning from the speakers we have. It’s a small village WI and the trans issue hasn’t affected us yet. Am about to renew my subs and it’s the policies that make me feel a bit meh about that, but I value the single sex environment and the friendship I encounter at our monthly meetings.

We have a men’s club in our village. It’s called the working men’s club and women cannot join. We are allowed to visit as an invited guest. Seems no one has a problem with that. Yet women have a group and we are expected to let men in to be kind. Some women do not have a network of friends or they may be new to the area. They may need support, friendship and safety from women. Not men. Not transwomen whose experiences are different. Why do we keep being expected just to roll over? It might be the WI but when all the senior positions on management boards are full of men and TW it will be too late to complain and say that women are excluded.

We think we've progressed but we are just fighting the same battles against a more devious opponent.

@EsmaCannonball depressing but so very true.

Well, this is going well...

Here's Bel Mooney's offering on the subject:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11987807/Strong-women-raison-detre-Womens-Institute.html

Currently the Facebook page run by the magazine WI Life is asking how local groups are 'planning to celebrate Pride month' and suggesting they 'get in touch with your local LGBTQ+ organisations and find out how you can join this June'.

But why on earth should members of the Women's Institute care anything about Pride month (an American import) and its frequently provocative displays of LGBTQ+ activism often in the shape of glitter, rainbows, drag queens, leather-fetishism and other sorts of semi-sexual posturing in the streets?

My understanding of the Haldane judgment is that no, they currently can't be excluded as they are legally female.

If WI was a service or public function then they could exclude tw with a GRC if they could show it was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim - but those rules don't apply to associations.

If we get the amendment clarifying that sex in the EA means biological sex then they could be excluded.

From Baroness Falkner's letter:

Freedom of association for women and men. Schedule 16 para 1 permits the restriction of membership to persons who share a protected characteristic.

Currently the law does not allow the exclusion of trans people who hold a GRC from an association whose membership is restricted on the basis of sex. For instance, on the current definition of sex, a women’s social club or religious organisation (if it met the definition of an association: see Section 107 and explanatory notes) could not restrict membership to biological women. It would have to admit any trans woman who had obtained a GRC. There is no provision in law for the association to exclude them. This has an impact on freedom of association for women.

A change in the law would allow sex-based associations to restrict membership on the basis of biological sex.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/clarifying-definition-%E2%80%98sex%E2%80%99-equality-act

(Link to the full letter is in 'Notes to editors' on the above page)