I wonder what the WI are going to announce on Woman's Hour in the next few minutes?

[nauticant]

Apparently it will be a matter of the greatest seriousness and sorrow.

Anyone who objects to single sex organisations yet somehow, I infer, is fine with the notion of a ‘single gender’ one - whatever the heck that might mean - has absolutely no legal or logical legs to stand on.

What is the “good argument” for women , transwomen but not other men please ?

Why should we be worried?
and
How will it cut?

Don't be so vague. If you've got something to say, say it.

And just to add:
organisations are being forced to change their policies to align with the law

Sadly the WI 'leadership' does not understand its grass roots members. That has been the case for years. The tone of the press release is ridiculous, full of regret for a policy that it is likely the majority of members did not support.

Sisterhood meetings are not pointless - they are another object of obedience, like the rainbow lanyard

'Oh, I didn't see you at the sisterhood meeting' = transphobic bigot

If that is in reference to my post above, then personally I don't think there is a particularly good argument, apart from 'enough people want it'. Which, for associations, may be reasonable? (Not under current law, just to be clear). I am speculating.

Well, actually that is what the Equalities act does. Under the protected category of 'Sex' all males can be excluded ( including those with the protected category of Gender Re-assignement). It would also not be legally sound to permit acces to some males, but not to others.

The point is that there is nothing coherent about a group for women and trans'women'. It has to be a group for women and trans'women' and men and trans'men' to be coherent. At which point it is simply a group for men and women, a mixed sex group for all adults.

Also, every women's service that includes men restricts the numbers of women's services that don't. If a woman wishes to access a women-only refuge it is discrimatory to force her to travel across the country because all her local groups are mixed sex. This is not a zero-sum game, if you give to men you take from women.

There will be suicides from an already marginalised group of people over decisions like these.

Ah right. Emotional blackmail is alive and well.

Good! I can’t wait for this idiocy to end! Transwomen are not being excluded because they’re trans, but because they’re male! In the exact same way, hypothetical transwoman, Mary, isn’t allowed to join the local primary school not because she’s trans but because she’s 48.

I understand your logic loop entirely . The issue is that it only works if you accept its premise that trans women are men. This does not reflect the opinions/ values / understanding of the women's institute, nor a significant component of British society.

No. The WI wish to take advantage of the single sex provisions for clubs & associations within the Equality Act 2010 to be a female only organisation. Sex under the EA2010 means sex at birth. The WI could have lobbied for the law to be changed so that under the EA2010 sex means whatever but it's very telling that they make no such commitment.

I’m pulling my girls out after this announcement.

Is that allowed at WI meetings? It certainly didn't seem the sort of atmosphere when I went.

Did you mean to post on a Girl Guides thread?

Or are you really pulling your "girls" out of the WI?

😳I say!

You're pulling your girls out of the WI? How old are they?! Can't they make their own decisions?

What about suicides in girls and women who have been abused, raped, gaslit, discriminated against by men. Do they not count? Do those women not deserve safe spaces like the TIM you describe?

"I’m pulling my girls out after this announcement."
Are you getting confused with Girl Guiding? Because the WI is for adult women, not girls.

cackling in glee

Yes. Imagine women being pleased their rights have been upheld. Dear me, whatever next! We’ll be giving them the vote soon!

Now, excuse me because I must get back to making the sandwiches for the men, tittering at their unfunny jokes, standing back while they go first, being a nice, well-behaved support human to The Men, and repainting the “Doormat” sign on my forehead.

I’m pulling my girls out after this announcement.

If they belong to the WI, they should be old enough to do it themselves.

However, assuming you meant this for the Guiding thread.... how do you know they're girls?

Because if a government in power wanted to, I think they could get an amendment to the Equality Act in this specific area passed, such that it became legal to have associations that allowed in women and transwomen (potentially only with GRCs) but excluded men.

I think the problem with passing that legislation would be that it shines too much light on GRCs.

If you say that people with GRCs are going to have specific rights that other men don't, you really have to pin down what a GRC is, and if anything make the restrictions tighter than they are at the moment, (not sure what would be sufficient) which wouldn't please anyone.

Why bother when the WI can just choose to be mixed sex?

🤣🤣🤣🤣

You’re pulling them out of Girl Guides? How old are they?

I was at the RDA annual conference last week. The majority of the audience were middle aged and older women; the volunteer backbone of the UK. I assume the WI grassroots membership is similarly dominated by no-nonsense older women. I'd love it of they all quietly left and set up their own female focussed organisation, called the Institute of Women or suchlike. The handmaidens, AGPs and TRAs can hang out with each other at the old version.

You are all what is wrong with the world.

Snap! I think your sexism is what's wrong with the world!

They could change their charter if they are so desperate to allow men to join but of course they would have to allow non trans identifying males as well.

who determines the moral beliefs of an organisation? The elite group at the top or the membership? The WI could choose to poll their membership on changing their charter. Why are they choosing not to?