RSPB women-only photography workshops

[CatrionaCat]

Run by women, for women... and that other sort of women.

So much for safe, women-only options. From RSPB Old Moor.

FFS. So women & “any bloke who fancies preying women who need homosocial activities for cultural reasons/women who need them due to trauma/women who’d just like some space away from men & their fecking boundaries respected”. Because they’ve merrily included “non-binary” there as well, without even the stipulation of “AFAB”.

They clearly DON’T “recognise the value of diversity” because they’re shutting out a load of women; & instead prioritising a group that is overwhelmingly white, male & middle-class. Which is what most people would think of if asked to describe an RSPB member [of staff] or volunteer, let’s face it.

FFS. This entire thing is like living through a real time re-enactment of "Invasion of the body snatchers", with everyone and everything being replaced by gender loons. make it stop!

These decision makers should be presented with a two question survey that quotes their policy back at them, along the lines of:

1. We recognise that women often don't feel safe when alone in rural environments. We therefore host some women only events. We do this because:
   (A) violence against woman and girls is nearly always committed by males, so having female only events can make females feel more comfortable in rural and isolated environments.
   (B) violence committed by males against women and girls is not committed by males who don't like to think of themselves, and don't want others to think of them, as male. Therefore, woman don't have concerns about being alone in an isolated area with this category of male.
   (C) females' risk from males is eliminated when they wear dresses, make up and use female pronouns. Therefore, women don't have concerns about being alone in an isolated area with this category of male.

2. In light of the answers given to question 1, is our policy to include males with trans identities in female only events fit for the purpose of helping women feel safe in isolated areas:
   (A) Yes
   (B) No

“We are determined that on-one should experience any prejudice” …. Well apart from those rather less well-funded and less shouty groups of women who are now completely excluded.

Of course, most women have no problem being around men in general, but might still feel more comfortable heading out (alone?) into the reserve, knowing that there are no men around. It’s a slightly different situation knowing that there are no men around who respect women’s boundaries. This is not to say that I believe all transwomen to be dangerous, rather that men who are dangerous can easily claim a trans identity. I wonder how carefully the RSPB thought about this?!

Non Binary comes under the category of ‘women’? I thought the whole point was to deny that reality.

Like the questionnaire approach. Genuinely think that this has been done to 'be kind' with no information or thinking beyond this.

Suggest adding in a question about whether they have heard of the term AGP.
Ask them to read a short definition. One containing evidenced information about the frequency of this and sexual arousal component.

I might just ask them for their definition of 'transwoman'. I'd like to hear them clarify.

It can be 'inclusive' of men or it can be women only, it can't be both.

https://events.rspb.org.uk/events/72733

I can't even form the sentences I want for this one. @ArabellaScott they seem to be struggling with the definition of female too.

That's one for the government's consultation on incorrectly used single sex provision, I think.

But it's women's* job to budge over for anyone who wants a bit of our space, don't you know?

*only actual women, obvs. Oddly, everyone knows who we are when there's budging to be done.

https://www.rspb.org.uk/contact-us

Odd really.
I bet they understand the word 'female' perfectly well when it's applied to birds.

Women only events where male predators are allowed as long as they wear a dress.

I might drop them a wee line and ask how they would provide for a woman of faith who wants genuinely single sex provision. Especially given the findings of surveys showing that minority ethnic groups are less likely to use the countryside.

Actual women mentioned after the males in their "inclusive" definition there.

Sheclicks is the same, anyone who identifies as a woman.

The RSPB EDI policy in all its glory.

You only need to ‘identify’ as a woman for the RSPB to meet its aim of a gender balanced board.

https://base-prod.rspb-prod.magnolia-platform.com/dam/jcr:d3000e70-8b0b-4d67-bca0-81387991b5de/060-0239-22-23_edi-external-statement_version-2.1_english.pdf

It isn’t just safety, men DO alter the dynamic.

Even nice chaps can assume they’re in charge (even when no one needs to be), mansplain, dominate the conversation (bore on) and even patronise the women around them.

I know loads will say “well, they’re not actually decent men” but I have met (and am even close to) men like this. They are good men but there’s an Ingrained chauvinism they don’t recognise. They simply can’t see how their behaviour is enforcing a male dominated culture. And women don’t always want to challenge it in a lovely activity like birdwatching.

I know women can be dicks as well, but it’s almost always the Man Here of the group that pisses on everyone’s fun whilst having a lovely time themselves (and not recognising other people are frustrated). Then women choose to not go because otherwise it’s aggro and your nice activity is over.

Scratch the surface and almost all “women only” events, holidays, clubs etc are like this. I have looked into several because I’d quite like to do some, but it’s the same every time.

The result is I don’t even bother any more - as soon as I see that on something I assume it means the opposite of what it says. That instead of the safety and camaraderie of a woman-only group, you run a good chance of not just a man being there, but a horrible disrespectful man who’s more likely than the average man to be dangerous- because he either actively wants in on something that’s meant to be for women for validation and to centre himself, or doesn’t care about their feelings. And as any woman who doesn’t want that will self-exclude, the other women there will probably be sucking up to him and reassuring him he’s just as much a woman as them (something no one ever says to an actual woman).

and apart from anything else why do these things always list “non-binary” as well? By their own genderism definitions an NB person is not a woman, so an NB female wouldn’t want to be there. I can only conclude it’s yet another way to make things even easier for predatory or narcissistic men, who only need to announce they’re NB and they’re in.

and yes it’s not just about the safety. It’s about the vibe. Men being selfish, dominating and me-me-me (not all men but you definitely encounter them in any group activity) is a big part of the reason women-only activities appeal to me.

Well. Please let the organisers know.

They have created an event that many women may have been interested in, and then fucked it right up.

It doesn't need to be a confrontational thing, but if nobody ever points out that they're actually excluding many women/stymieing attempts to help include women, then they will only hear the 'be kind' and 'stunning and brave' narrative.

The reality is that a women-only event is not the same as an event for 'women plus men who fancy it'.

I know loads will say “well, they’re not actually decent men” but I have met (and am even close to) men like this. They are good men but there’s an Ingrained chauvinism they don’t recognise. They simply can’t see how their behaviour is enforcing a male dominated culture.

Totally. Because they see themselves as nice guys they cannot fathom that they’re sexist or know-it-all. I know so many men like this. No they’re not the worst men, but it’s frustrating and does completely change the dynamic.

But event organisers will assume they are doing the best and right thing unless the problem is pointed out to them.

Unfortunately, this means that they then have a choice -

1. Continue to prioritise male feelings over women's feelings
2. Decide to acknowledge that women-only needs to mean women-only
3. Abandon any attempts to redress sex imbalance with single sex events.

I'm afraid 3 is probably most likely for risk averse organisations.

However, I also think that a mixed sex event presented as single sex is worse than a mixed sex event.

Advertising, descriptions, and language needs to be clear.

Totally agree. Which is why women-only groups will go underground to survive. No advertising, just word of mouth. slow hand claps the progressives

(1B) needs to be edited to add "No predatory male would ever lie about his feelings about his gender, therefore no predatory male could ever exploit these arrangements in order be with women in an isolated area without other males present"