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

The men they referred to don't have endometriosis, as they are men, without uteruses or the lining of said uteruses - the endometrium. Endometrial cells from here cause endometriosis, in women with uteruses. Endometrial cells are a type of Epithelial cell, of which there are many types in all bodies, of both sexes. They line things, like organs and blood vessels https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559063/#:~:text=Epithelial%20cells%20are%20among%20the,physiological%20functions%20in%20different%20organs.
Epithelial cells have the ability to move or migrate, in some circumstances, and hence are implicated in lots of human 'inappropriate growth' conditions, like endometriosis in women, some forms of cancer, warts etc.

29 men have a similar condition to endometriosis where a similar type of epithelial cell from somewhere else in their body (not endometrial cells from the endometrial lining of their uteruses, because they don't have them) behave is a similar 'migrating to the wrong place' way and cause a similar 'clogging up' issue to endometriosis. This is not endometriosis, because they're not misbehaving endometrial cells and calling it endometriosis in men is a misnomer. It's like saying that men get ovarian cancer or women get testicular cancer. Similar, related, same type of tissue involved, yes, but the sex-specifc version, and not the same disease with not the same prevalence, treatment, progression, survival rates etc because found in the very different hormonal and genetic context of the 2 different sexes. As evidenced by the fact that Steph and Jodie can only find 29 men with this condition, as opposed to the millions that suffer from endometriosis.

Perhaps, given Steph's lack of credentials and the charity's small size and modest funding, it could be more usefully repurposed to support the 29 men with this distressing condition. As Steph's only motivation is a passionate desire to help people who are suffering, Steph could probably do a lot of good here raising the profile of this condition in men and transwomen, who Steph is also passionate about.

I should have clarified that I was talking in general terms, not about this particular case. I just feel it is dangerous to think that nobody on any one ‘side’ can be capable of using abusive language. That sort of thinking can lead to blind spots about abuse from ‘our side’, that is all I mean. People who throw out insults won’t necessarily be mindful of the connotations, or may not even care about the issue at all, they are just doing it to stir trouble, because they can.

Fair enough. But my experience is that women, and particularly women from the GC side, are extremely careful and thoughtful about their chocie of language, as they have had to be to maintain a voice in this debate.

Maybe not GC women, but definitely people who would just happily weigh into any toxic debate because it gives them an excuse to chuck insults with impunity. It doesn't take a PhD to recognise that the genuinely concerned voices on the GC side are much less likely to say such awful things than the more vocal TRAs, whose vested interests are obvious and not as altruistic....?

Generally from the GC side we’re accused of hate if we say “men aren’t women” (even though that’s a fact, just like “the Earth isn’t flat”). Also, if we object to the word “woman” being erased and we want to keep our single-sex provisions and sports etc, that is viewed by the TRA lobby as “hateful”.

Now on to the “hate” from the other side. You could wallpaper a whole street full of houses with it, it’s everywhere, and notice the very clear difference in tone to the terven. How many so-called terfs say things like “die in a grease fire”; “choke on my girldick”; “I punch TRAs”; “decapitate TRAs”?

Answer: I’ve yet to come across any terfs wishing violence on anyone. Are they out there? I have no idea. But whoever told Jodie she should be burned alive is, quite frankly, a disgusting person.

I’d love to know how many women with endometriosis fall into the hateful terf category I outlined in my first paragraph. Steph wants to see terfs in hell. Maybe the majority of women that Steph is meant to be advocating for are actually bigots on the wrong side of history? How can Steph help them if Steph wants to see them in hell?

If I hated a huge proportion of men and wished they’d all go to hell, I couldn’t front a men’s health charity.

I feel sorry for women because I would have loved to be able to explain more about endometriosis.

Oh God how narcissistic do these words sound? “I feel sorry for women because they didn’t get to hear me waffle on about something I learned about from Googling it last week”.

Just imagine having to learn about your medical condition from a person who uses women’s health as a way to validate their own identity and to push a political ideology into the mainstream. I actually think that the internet would be the better option.

I certainly don't claim that abuse never comes from our side. I can't know if or how much does.

But I am sure it's very much less likely to come from us. It's far more likely that the burn to death comment to Jodie was from a men's rights activist wanting it to seem to come from us, or some random Internet sicko.

I’ve certainly seen some pretty harsh name calling coming from the GC side of things (even against others on the same side). I don’t doubt there are a few people out there who would go a step further and send abusive messages. There are always a people who go too far linked with every cause. I don’t think it’s remotely equivalent though to the abuse that comes from trans activists which is off the scale (evidenced by the growing number of convictions/ cautions etc.)

Edit to say I don’t think I’ve seen much in the way of threats of violence from the GC side though. Mostly just name calling.

Answer: I’ve yet to come across any terfs wishing violence on anyone. Are they out there? I have no idea. But whoever told Jodie she should be burned alive is, quite frankly, a disgusting person.

And a man, my X years of experience of being a woman on this planet reliably inform me.

Thanks for that Al, very informative.

From my brief skim it seems that men who have been exposed to an excess of oestrogen might suffer more from this disease.

Is that right? In which case, maybe transwomen are more prone? ;Although, it's not endometriosis.)

It seems to me that a lot of things that are female specific - periods, abortion, miscarriage, pregnancy, breastfeeding, etc, make some men desperate to claim they can experience it.

From fake period kits, to pretending to miscarry.

Endometriosis is no different, I'm assuming.

Hence the initial premise that men and transmen can get it.

There are not two sides, there are three.

The people who believe in mental gender instead of sex

The people who believe your sex determines your mental gender

The people who don't believe in mental gender

It's the first two who are likely to throw insults, abuse and threats because they are taking opposite sides.

The last group are trying to have a completely different conversation but the first two are too busy shouting to hear.

Yeah! Trying to take the moral high ground 🤣

trans activists which is off the scale (evidenced by the growing number of convictions/ cautions etc.)

I'm not familiar with any of them being convicted/cautioned for abuse-related activities, so it's interesting to know that. (Genuine, I haven't been keeping track.)

Yes it's a small charity but it is still a charity! Bound by processes and legislation! Plus one day it might become a large charity, as PPs have mentioned. Look at Mermaids.

It can be quite difficult to become a charity and most grifters will become a CIC, a lot easier.

Apart from the whole recruitment farce (did they do "Safer Recruiting"?) if I was a trustee I would also be very concerned about Conflict of Interest, as explained by the Charity Commission

• Conflicts can affect all types of charities. But you must identify and deal with them properly. All of you must do this, not just the trustee with the conflict. Otherwise, you will not meet your joint legal responsibility to make decisions:* *• based only on what’s best for your charity • without influence from your personal interests

I'm sure no one would agree this appointment is best for the charity AND there was influence by Jodie's personal interests.

Not to me tuons Steph's

These are the ones that immediately come to mind. I'm sure there are others...

Tara Wolfe

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack/

Cathy Brennan

https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/feminist-speaker-julie-bindel-attacked-by-transgender-person-at-edinburgh-university-after-talk-545841

Joanna Cherry

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19480206.grant-karte-sentenced-sending-threatening-messages-joanna-cherry/

Unnamed man (Scotland received caution for assaulting a woman)

https://unherd.com/thepost/police-scotland-stands-by-as-feminist-is-attacked/

Sarah Jane Barker (recalled to prison for breaching parole conditions)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12307299/transgender-activist-sarah-jane-baker-recalled-prison.html

Just before the WH interview, at around 0925 on Tuesday, Steph appeared on Nick Ferrari's show on LBC. I've just listened (you need the Global Player app).

Ferrari was insufficiently informed about endo or about Steph's background to do more than suggest that, being a transwoman, Steph woould never be able to experience endo and so might not be best placed to head such a charity. Steph was, of course, easily able to bat away such mild questioning and got a very easy ride indeed. Ferrari, like so many male interviewers when dealing with trans issues, tiptoed around, trying desperately to not say anything that might cause offence.

I'm sure Steph bounced in smug triumph from that to WH. Must have been a helluva shock to come up against a forensic and challenging interviewer who had done her research on Steph's activism and knew far, far more about endo than Steph ever could.

Sadly, Steph did not seize the opportunity to educate the listening public on the subject of endometriosis. but chose to concentrate on Stephself.

Fantastically clear and useful, thank you.

As ever, I learn more on Mumsnet than I ever could imagine learning from a trans activist claiming to represent women.

In this case there is apparently no research. DH, a scientist/academic, has taken a look and he says it's unusual that Jodie has published no academic papers at all. She has 3 listed, but when you look into them they do not constitute research. Two are summaries of conference contrubtions and one is a poster displayed at a conference. The masters is a taught masters, not a research based masters.

He takes the lack of evidence of research and the vague description of the field to mean it's a self-funded, political appointment and that this person is over egging the custard in what they present themselves as.

It's then quite worrying that their academic listing shows more media output than research. And also acting as adviser on various committees.

Very I unusual. In my day you wouldn't get withing sniffing distance of a funded PhD unless you had at least been named on one of your Bsc final year thesis project lab's papers as a contributor. And you'd be expected to have published at least one as a main contributor during the first couple of years of your PhD. I only know about science based PhDs though, I suspect this one might be a social sciences based one so the criteria may be different.

Just listened again. I did particularly enjoy EB's tone when the 29 men with endometriosis were cited. Just the repetition of the number conveyed worlds of meaning <chef's kiss>

Steph has released a statement:

I suspect this one might be a social sciences based one so the criteria may be different.

Jodie's LinkedIn says she has a BSc in nutrition and health from the University of Roehampton - so at the softer end of the biological sciences.

I see Steph still can't get Emma's name right.