William Hague telling women what to do

[SerendipityJane]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/04/18/william-hague-womens-institute-wi-transgender/

That's Lord Hague to you. Tory peer in House of Lords.

Just checked Hague doesn't appear to have any children, so he probably thinks 'transing the gay away' at school is okay as well. Or am I being unfair assuming believing TWAW implies no need for child safeguarding either?

I think he's right about the fact that it is different from women's sport. He's just doing that man thing of talking confidently about things he doesn't understand, if women want to have mixed sex clubs and socialise in a mixed sex setting that is a freedom they have. He can't see the point therefore there isn't one. He doesn't understand, I think, how a TW can change the dynamic of a group of women. Some people might accept women socialising in a single sex setting / group as a legitimate aim others I suspect would not. Greater clarity would I think be beneficial.

Some excellent GC comments in the Daily Mail

What even the be-penised ones William Hague?

Heh, 'serial failure'.

What’s he doing opining when he has no skin in the game.

Unless he has aspirations to join the WI he has no business commenting

Caroline Nokes, chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee, told Times Radio: 'It's a wholly depressing state of affairs that we regard people who are born as biologically male as dangerous and that they should somehow be dangerous whether they're in a book club or in the WI or the Girl Guides.

'The stark reality is that trans people are amongst the most marginalised, amongst the most abused in our communities. And I think we can do better than trying to paint them all as dangerous predators.'

It is nothing to do with danger here. It is to do with having an organisation run for women by women.

Caroline Nokes is speaking as though she is the chairwoman of the transwomen’s committee. It just doesn’t work to say balancing rights between transwomen and women can be achieved by saying TW are W.

Opinions:

Sitting in my mansion,
Talking shit,
I thought I would liven things up a bit,
I told those women to let men in,
won’t hurt anyone, not a sin.
The world today must welcome men.
I will never go to WI,
Neither will my wife, she’d rather die.
Sitting in my mansion,
talking shit.

@boiledbeetle

I’m convinced that the vast majority of the ‘be kind’ lobby are still totally thick or oblivious to the fact that this is NOT about disliking or discriminating against transwomen. Most of us couldn’t give a shit about how some men wish to present themselves to the world.

It’s about biological women having spaces for themselves without male bodied people present.
Women’s Institute = for women.
Women’s sports = for women.
Women’s achievement awards = for women. Etc
Simple.

I fail to see why seemingly intelligent people don’t get that distinction. It’s not fucking complicated.

There's a really interesting circular argument running through that quoted bit.

Men aren't scary.
Transwomen are abused.

If men aren't scary and TW are right to be scared it follows that either she's wrong about one of those things or it's women doing the abusing. If it's women doing the abusing then surely poor TW shouldn't be subjected to them in the WI or anywhere else.

I think the logic always seems to be that men are scary, but only to TW. Which is a stretch if you look at the statistics. Can we decide if men are scary or not first? As a class. And if they are, the only people who can avoid them are women. If allowed to do so.

If it's vague it must be Hague.

To be honest I find his column in the Times generally full of good sense and insight.

He probably hasn't given much thought to this isue at at all and just sees it in terms of general progress and being 'reasonable'.

Meh. He is a fluent dissembler I think. Of course he sounds sensible against the backdrop of Bojo , Truss et al.
But he did seriously suggest making the UK the 51st State of the USA.

Maybe! But it is his reasonableness which also motivates his attitude towards the issue with the W.I

Very perceptive - and absolutely right. Men are apparently dangerous to trans women, but not to actual women.

I am friends with someone who is very good friends with William and Ffion Hague. I'll get her to have a word!

These comments seem really out of the norm for Hague. He's a very intelligent chap and I hope he said what he did because he's never actually thought about it deeply. He has no skin in this game and he doesn't get to set women's boundaries.

You open your arms to TW, mate. The WI is not for turning.

I don't agree with him, but I don't know that his view is uncommon, and it may not be inconsistent. I also think that being a politician he is supposed to say what his views are. If he was agreeing with people here they would be happy to hear from him.

There are lots of people who do not think that single sex groups should be a thing except in situations like sports or prisons. They think that social groups that are open to the public need to accept anyone regardless of sex and probably certain other things. We get people on FWR regularly that think that about groups for men too.

What he thinks about private groups I'm not sure, but it kind of sounds like he thinks transwomen and transmen should be treated as "the gender they identify as" for such groups. Which again, I disagree with, but it's not necessarily inconsistent between men and women.

And I'll add, I think the main reason so many people now don't get why men or women might want single sex social groups is because everything in our culture is constantly making out like that is an idea that makes no sense, that apart from genitals and reproduction, men and women have no other things that might give them an interest in being together in single sex groups, and also that it's kind of sexist to be interested in that.

I find that most young people fine even the idea of things like single sex university residences a bit weird. Often they've never been in any kind of single sex group growing up, unless they went to a boys or girls school. So they just have no experience to compare.

It's weird when people are regularly demanding other kinds of segregation now, but it seems to be the norm for single sex groups.

Hmm what else does Hague think women should 'get over' and 'get used to'?

Does he think that lesbians should get over and get used to penis? It sounds awfully like he probably does. It's rape culture basically - women can't say 'no', can't have their own boundaries and opinions. Need to be told what to do by a man.

We'll set up new single sex groups if we have to. Because women get on and do stuff, not just whinge about it and try and steal what's not ours to take.

I expect the WI to die a death after this. Allowing men in excludes transwidows for a start and most middle aged transitioners are narcissists who suck all the air out of the room. They know, of course they do, that not all women will welcome them but they barge on in anyway. Just like men, taking what's women's just because they want it. It's such male pattern behaviour, not very womanly at all.

Why can't they set up their own group? Any women who want to join could. That's what real women would do.

Historically, single-sex spaces have been used to enhance privilege for men, and ensure repression for women. "Separate but equal" has a resonance in certain places in the world.

This link was posted earlier in the thread.
https://leftfootforward.org/2011/04/tory-mps-gentlemens-club-memberships/

He was, possibly still is, a member of a number of 'gentlemen's clubs' which don't admit women.

So he seems to think it's OK for men to have clubs for just men, but women have to allow men to join their organisations.

I don't agree with him, but I don't know that his view is uncommon, and it may not be inconsistent. I also think that being a politician he is supposed to say what his views are

It's not a level playing field though, is it? I am sure that Hague would not dream of telling Times Radio that black people should pipe down about slavery, for example. He might well argue that paying reparations or pulling down statutes isn't a constructive approach, but he would contextualise that argument by acknowledging that harms that racism has done. Similarly with gay rights - I can't remember whether he was pro or anti gay marriage but I am sure that, when discussing it, he acknowledged the importance of gay rights - he didn't just say "Gay people need to shut up and accept this".

Contrast this with how he and most other men approach women's/trans rights. They show no awareness of the context and history behind single sex spaces - which is particularly staggering for Hague, given his excellent work highlighting sexual violence in wartime. As a man, he thinks it is OK to dictate to women what they should do. And he is not alone - we see this from virtually all men who comment on the issue. The irony is that the very power dynamic that allows men to feel that they can tell women what to do is the same power dynamic that makes single sex spaces so important. But men do not see that.

He has got skin in the game, is what I'm hearing. And to be honest, I've alway got that vibe from him. Weird childhood remember.

How the fuck is he, a man, in a position to tell women what’s comfortable and what’s not. It’s utterly creepy, I hope the WI stay strong on this.