Emma Barnett interviews Endometriosis South Coast Steph Richards and Trustee Jodie Hughes

[ChristinaXYZ]

You can listen here - it starts around the 22 minute mark.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001scsj

As I pointed out on another thread, the income of this charity is tiny and seems to come from a few events like a sponsored skydive - cake sale level of fundraising. It currently has no paid staff and its only asset is £2000 in the bank. However, it was only set up two years ago and that's no guarantee it might not grow and turn into something other than a small local campaigning group trying to raise awareness of endometriosis and lobby for more research into causes and treatment. Mermaids was a tiny parent-led group for its first few years and then SG got involved, and look what an effect they had on UK treatment of gender-confused children and teenagers.

Transcript = excellent, thank you. Going to listen for real in car on way to work this morning.

Thank you for the transcript. Emma certainly took no prisoners there. Most refreshing to read.
I wonder if Jodie is now having a "ooooh shit,what have I done?" moment,or whether she's firmly convinced that Steph is an ultra feminist and that everyone else is a nasty terfy bigot.

In the past there has been plenty of money earmarked for the support of trans people. Not least the money that used to go to Mermaids. Positioning a small charity to within the trans arena could open up a number of funding streams. Perhaps why they were willing to go on Women's hour in the first place. Within their bubble people are probably congratulating them for centring men and trans men, and they had not expected push back from either the interviewer or the general public.

And as others had pointed out it would have allowed access to various platforms interested in either women's health or LGBT+. Lots of attention, higher profile, more money.

Steph is accusing Emma Barnett of bullying (not sure if that has already been posted):

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-head-of-charity-accuses-womans-hour-host-emma-barnett-of-bullying-tfrw0j5l8

I followed the link in Jo Bartosch's excellent article to Steph's LinkedIn profile, and it's remarkably thin. Steph is 70 but there is nothing about Steph's career or what Steph was doing before taking up activism. No sign, either, of Steph having any educational qualifications. Very difficult to see what might qualify Steph to run a women's health charity, even a very small one.

This is such an important point - straight out of the Dentons playbook. This is exactly what they do and it's why making a fuss IS important.

To quote a JKR character (who turned out to have a point in the end) - constant vigilance...

I don't really want to give Steph's website the clicks by posting a link here but you can read up all you want to know about their background there, and a lot of stuff you probably don't, on their 'my story' page.

There is vile abuse on every side of every issue these days, and people are not necessarily aware/don’t care about the connotations. I think it can be problematic to think that it couldn’t come from one particular side, sadly.

Exactly.

Steph claimed they've been hired because they're good at activism. They set up Stephs Place, and now it's won awards or something.

But Steph is a transactivist. And the activism they do is transactivism.

I have absolutely no doubt, whatsoever, that steph will increase funding to an ostensible endometriosis charity, that is really a transactivism charity.

However, Steph's card is marked by women everywhere. From the daily Mail article:

Ms Richards, who uses the pronouns she and her, has repeatedly clashed with women's rights advocates, some of whom she has branded as 'terfs', and was previously involved in a protest outside the FiLiA feminist conference.

Everyone heard Steph's opening salvo in the interview that 'I'm passionate around feminism'. And continued to claim they're a feminist.

We are increasing public recognition that these people are the opposite of feminists. That they dislike women. And that is why women are outraged when they front up female charities.

(my AutoCorrect made that 'fuck up' female charities).

I hope other people interview Steph and Jodi and ask similar questions. But I'm going to hazard a guess that the woman's hour interview might have been the last one of that nature.

As we all know, the biggest promoters of gender critical feminism are transactivists. I suspect the TRA backlash that Emma gets is only going to strengthen her spine.

It's not vile or abuse to object to the erasure of the word woman or the appropriation of women's biology and medical issues though. And I'm sorry but I really don't know or know of any biological woman who would use the violent rhetoric of witches, hags and being burnt alive/at the stake against another woman. We've had the rhetoric and imagery used against us too many times, especially once we reach middle age, it's a common way for men to put women down, I really don't think any woman aware enough to be vocal in this debate would use it against another woman. Did she give a source? I'd be extremely surprised if it came from a gender critical woman. It's easy to claim abuse and vileness and transphobia but they're just words and a standard tool to try and discredit GC women, so I don't believe a word of it unless I see it for myself.

I note that Steph named Steph's charity after Stephself. I find that illuminating.

And unless Jodie provides actual receipts of this abuse, I'm going to file it under TRAs, subset Hyperbole, subset 'being disagreed with in even the most moderate terms = hate', subset Handmaidens.

Jodi might have received threats. It's a characteristic of social media that quite normal people enjoy sending the most disgusting threats.

But it won't be from anyone on the gender critical feminism side.

Fair, I should have added 'or if actual abuse, from some misogynist arsehole, but either way not narsty transphobes aka actual GC women'.

Sub- sub- set: being questioned by someone about your motivations and unusual way of describing endometriosis as 'non gynaecological' = 'bullying'

I have to say, the bullying claims did make me laugh, hollowly, remembering some of the comments my PhD supervisors gave me at various progress meetings and even at the actual viva. Now that was a roasting! Why should anyone care about this work you've spent the last X years or your life obsessively working on to the exclusion of all else? Why do you think this adds anything to scientific or human understanding? Who cares about this? Why did you design it like this and not that? etc etc. Jodie will need to toughen up if she's going to get through it and gain a doctorate at the end if she thinks someone mildy questioning her work and being a bit pissed off at her interpretation is bullying.

Sorry if I am missing something here, but that tiny number of men who have endometriosis; are these ‘born males (xy)’, transmen or people with DSDs? I don’t understand how ‘born males’ could have the condition unless we really have been misunderstanding what the disease is all this time?!

Poor Steph. The Mail continues to update the story.

"She said: 'In my statement I included the word 'everyone' but that wasn't good enough for Emma. I was surprised at the aggression. She wanted to carry on going back to it all the time.

'I've had loads of messages, emails from women saying: 'Why did she do that?' She obviously had an agenda to pick up on such a small point. She was basically looking for problems. I feel sorry for women because I would have loved to be able to explain more about endometriosis. It was a manufactured debate.'"

'Everyone' is not a substitute for the word 'woman'. Just as being a woman is not something you can just identify in and out of.

Ooh, 'everyone'. Steph, you're too kind

They are XY men, with a condition similar/related to traditional female endometriosis but that obviously is not happening in the womb. (I think).

Steph's LinkedIn profile is interesting. I'm exposed to lots of CEOs through working at various startups and I have never seen one whose profile revealed:

Only 2 digit followers and 2 digit connections, literally unheard of.

No educational history. As well as a degree, I can't remember seeing one who didn't also have an MBA.

No work history or experience before 2020 for someone in their 70s.

A profile banner that obscures the name of their website, the name of which means something completely different to their processes aims (translucent = semi-transparent, nobody with a professional marketing team would sign off on that shady association).

It comes across more and more as a very amateur attempt to push ones own agenda, rather than having any actual professional credibility.

It's explained by a scientist/HCP somewhere on this thread or one of the others on this subject, but as far as I (a layperson!) can remember, the 29 cases mentioned were all in men, i.e. human males. They obviously didn't have bits of endometrium migrating to other parts of the body, but they did have various medical issues - e.g. some sort of hormonal imbalance, or they were having hormone treatment for another condition, e.g. prostate cancer, or they were so obese that normal male hormones were disrupted - and this caused the growth of endometrium-like tissue in various parts of the body, e.g. bladder, where it caused problems. This is so vanishingly rare in males that the very few cases identified get written up in medical journals.

There will undoubtedly be large numbers of transmen with endometriosis given it affects one in ten women and girls of reproductive age.

If a woman with a difference of sexual development has a womb, she may also suffer from endometriosis, I'd have thought.

There's a whiff of Steph thinking Emma wasn't womaning properly what with her 'aggression' and all. Steph on the other hand is doing it properly because Steph feels sorry for women and lots of lovely women have been sending Steph supportive messages. Apparently.

Urgh. It's all such a fucking performance.

I understand that Steph was a hairdresser and in the beauty business before transitioning and become a TRA.

It can't be stated often enough that this is a tiny charity with £8k annual income last year and no employees. We're not looking at a recruitment process comparable to a new CEO for Oxfam or similar. If Jodie had asked another friend over coffee to take on some of the routine admin nobody would even have noticed. The issue here is not really with Steph's competence to run a charity, given that next to nothing will be required if they carry on as they have been doing. It's not because Steph is male. It's because this is a charity promoting awareness of a medical condition that virtually exclusively affects women and girls and it's now got a high profile transactivist at the helm, who has organised protests against FILIA, etc etc, as documented on this thread. The suspicion has to be that Steph sees this as both validation - Steph has a GRC and believes that identifying as a woman makes Steph a woman, regardless of biology - and also a chance to use 'inclusive' language about a female condition. The fact that this makes much of their website's content inaccurate and less likely to inform the target audience is much less important to Steph (and sadly to Jodie, it would seem).

@TeenDivided @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g

Thank you! That makes more sense now

Mmmnotsure amazing work, thank you!