Meet the new CEO of Endometriosis South Coast

[Maaate]

I don't know why I'm surprised really

Looks like they are a tiny charity running on around £8K a year and the CEO role may be voluntary. I've not found any advert for it. Nevertheless, if I lived in the area they covered, I'd have nothing to do with them.

Very well said. I had endometriosis. The menopause was a blessed relief when it finally came.

Women's bodies are so much more complex than men's. As my GP said when I asked for a gynae referral after failing to conceive after a year of trying, it's all so complicated frankly it's a miracle it ever works at all. And yet there's completely inadequate funding for research and treatment of many extremely common conditions that only affect women and girls.

0.1% of the male population identifies as trans. They have nothing physically wrong with them. Yet the NHS is expected to pay for surgeries, therapies and the world is awash with trying to accommodate them to make their lives easier. Amen to that.

Important role? Vital services?

This is an extremely small local charity which has about the same income as a part time Etsy shop. If they're providing any vital services then I'm a cat.

I'll scratch your hairy back etc.

flickersy it’s a general observation.

I’ve never had endometriosis but it’s quite common and I would think a local service for sufferers would be quite important to women who have it, as with any health issue.

So there you have it.

The charity is actually being used as a Trojan horse not to support women with Endometriosis but to push trans rights. It's not centring women.

If the CEO was centring women and not pushing their own agenda through the charity there wouldn't be a problem with them being CEO.

It's their hijacking that's the issue. Not their identity as such.

I delved around a bit in Endometriosis South Coast's website yesterday and I don't think I'd have donated even before the Advent of Steph.

As others here mention, it bends over backwards to be 'inclusive' while denying the existence of women, there's a blog about somebody's 'privilege' (linked to BLM stuff, if I recall correctly) and all that rubbish. I would have thought such a tiny charity would focus on its core purpose, but they've proved themselves so very easily distracted.

As a result of all this I now thoroughly investigate all charities I donate to, even very low amounts. Don't collar me outside the station or supermarket and expect me to sign up. After signing up to Great Ormond Street Hospital's fundraiser outside a shop and discovering that the hospital flies the 'progress pride' flag ... well, that was it for me.

Due diligence is what's needed. Every single time.

They are looking for Trustee applications!

What Magdalen Burns said. ^^

What makes me smile, in a wry, oh ffs way, is that they're going to all this trouble to remove any sexed reference to this female disorder,

while employing a male who is there solely because of the benefits to said male's personal experience in it being a specifically and exclusively female, internal, gynecological thing . They will have no interest whatsoever in de femaling this condition. Oh what a lovely bucket they've found to splash about in.

Will I be donating to a charity whose priority apparently is providing lovely feels to a male by exploiting women?

No. I won't.

Imagine if that CEO blacked up every day and insisted he was actually black.

My life was blighted for 30 years with endometriosis, which left me infertile. I think this is a disgusting decision. Why on earth do these organisations keep on pandering to men who basically want to play dress-up.

@AlisonDonut no of course not. Is this man saying he has endometriosis? If so then of course that's bonkers. But if not, then I don't think being male should preclude someone from heading up an endometriosis charity if he has a background in fundraising/charity sector.

Tiny charity it may be but the Trustees have legal responsibilities, they can't allow anyone to spread misinformation or to divert the purpose of the charity. If this is happening it needs reporting to the Charity Commission.

Sorry if I've missed it but does anyone know Steph's background? Other than being a man? Does he have a track record in women's health or in the charity sector? Just wondering what qualified him for the role.

Mind you, I fondly remember the days of hearing a male person had been appointed as a Labour women's officer, and thinking 'well it will be interesting to see how a TW represents women and I don't see why they shouldn't be able to if their interest and focus is on women'.

Oh the innocence. My lovely, happy and trusting open mindedness didn't last long past that appointment.

He hates Mumsnet too, unsurprisingly. All those women talking. Tsk tsk.

The desire to put one's fist through a screen just because some disobedient women aren't convinced by you is such lady behaviour.

Given Steph has made a brilliant start by making 2 relevant typos in their first post, this seems to be an appointment made mostly for Instagram. If they are one of the vanishingly rare males who have endo it's odd it hast been mentioned before.

Shows the danger of assuming that any old thing is a meaningful organisation to talk to. Two friends who go to the gym together deciding to make up a charity or community interest company or whatever it is shouldn't have any special voice in local healthcare etc.

Just asking, did you pretend to be blind for this charity work?

I imagine she didn't turn up outside events for blind people with a set of people with abusive placards to protest them, either.

Or insist that blind people recognise that someone with self identified blindness is just as 'valid' as someone who is actually blind, and that those actually blind people recognise them as more oppressed and important to centre, due to people not fully appreciating the vulnerability of someone who self identifies as blind.

He is using women’s pain to validate his pathetic identity

There's that phrase isn't there, about a lovely warm bath of someone else's oppression.

I have no objection to a man being the CEO of a charity supporting a female need if he is committed, effective and ensures it's women's understanding of their needs that sets his agenda not his own assumptions.

If that man happened to wear male-cut dresses and makeup not because he associates them with womanhood but just because he likes them and thinks men should be able to wear them as well as women, that is also totally fine.

But I do not believe a man, or indeed anyone, who displays disordered thinking about womanhood, women or women's lives is an appropriate choice.

A man who believes womanhood is a personality trait and thereby blinds himself to the huge impact being born female has on our lives is displaying hugely disordered thinking about womanhood, women and women's lives and for that reason alone should not be CEO of any charity supporting a female need, let alone one tied so closely to female biology.

Jodie is hook line and sinker a believer that gender is far more important than a person’s sex so it does not surprise me that she approached Steph for the role.

@AlisonDonut I don't know anything about him, apart from.the fact that he's a man who thinks TWAW. I was responding to.those people who said a man can't represent/advocate for women's health, which I don't agree with.

I like what @FlirtsWithRhinos says.