A call to all wims to challenge registered charities who claim to be women’s services who include “transwomen”

[Hedgehogforshort]

Inspired by a post about Nottinghams Women’s Centre being trans inclusive, I think it is time we did something. Like pull the ruddy rug on them.

I don’t think it will need the extensive work of the NHS data thread.

There are hundreds of alleged women’s only services who are registered charities. They mostly have a governing document describing themselves as for women only but do not mention “transwomen” in their objects, but do in unlawful policy documents.

All charities have a beneficiary group, which they cannot stray from.

Also if they change their objectives to be “inclusive’”IMHO” the funds they hold on behalf of the original beneficiaries, must be handed back or ring fenced, which is why some of the major charities have conceded, ergo the WI and GG.

My idea is that we target our own localities and make a complaint to the charity commission, about the charity we are a potential beneficiary of.

what do you all think? Happy to coordinate this though i may need @knottyauty

meanwhile i am off to look at a few national bodies

Ok so in summary he is a man on a mission to prevent women from having single sex spaces because he sees their existence as an attack on men.

We used to have a term for people like that...

What is it with these people who are so determined that women will not have anything for ourselves? What is their reasoning?? There are plenty of services and organisations that specifically assist men, without them inveigling themselves into ours.
It isn't necessary, right, just or safe. Of course, alternative services do not give that validation. Tyler Porter has illustrated just what it is and it isn't nice.

Kevin appears to be extremely virtue signalling.
Someof the replies are priceless! Genocide? What an insult to the victims of real genocides- how that word is bandied around. Disgusting

I am thinking out loud here so to speak. For starters i do not think we can place men in separate boxes of typology, but broadly speaking i think there are categories of men of which i cannot articulate at this time of night.

Kevin falls in to the Bragg type 1a category of men, who honestly do not realise they are raving misogynists.

Hello wims

I won't reveal all but just to say I have some early evidence that the campaign of this thread is starting to work.

Keep going!

Ooo good news. Single sex services here we come 😀

This is a good point and I'm not at the end of the thread yet so this may have been said already. So the funders are forcing women only charities to say they are inclusive of men to get funding. This goes against their charitable objectives so another prong is to see which institutions are effectively forcing women's groups to go against there own objectives. Is it councils? We know nearly half of councils have done nothing to implement the Supreme Court ruling. Their funding policies need to be called out in parallel to this fantastic project.

Also what about community led things that are not charities. So in the East Midlands Derby Women's Day runs the inclusive International Women's Day Derby. You can't get a stall unless you say you are inclusive and agree to their constitution (not available online in 2026), but in 2023 this only talked about women and girls in it's aims and objectives, though did say self identifying women could be a trustee.

But it is not a charity, so what to do! It's so dishonest and exclusionary!

I know of funders that support single sex work for women and girls. Volant and Women’s Fund for Scotland.

I think Rosa UK might as well.

Okay, finally caught up with the thread.

But if Councils in particularly are telling Women's groups they have to be inclusive of men then the Councils are surely breaching the Equality Act? Transwomen is not a thing in the Equality Act it's Gender Reassignment. As stated by one of the Judges in an early court case of For Women Scotland (I heard this on the Inciteful Sisters podcast I was listening to yesterday with Susan Smith). So Councils are saying in order to get funding and meet our Equality Duties you have to include this group of men who are not in the Equality Act. It's unlawful. Maybe women responding to their councils about the Sumpreme Court Judgment can ask about funding rules and if they too are SCJ compliant? I think we know they will not be.

Still would like your thoughts on Women's Day Derby.

Here is a link.
womensdayderby.wordpress.com/

Well most LA funding pots do not tender for women only DVA and SV support services, as they tend to take the view that services should provide for male and female victims.

I agree all survivors should be able to access support. But most perpetrators are male, and victims female. Nowadays much of the abuse support for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse is group based, for financial reasons. And just one male in a group affects many women.

So it's fine for providers to help both male and female victims, but they need to protect female only groups- the examples of services on page 1 of this thread don't. And this has been allowed by funders eg local councils and police (trained by transactivists).

So although most victims are female, and groups will often be female only by accident to reflect that, female victims don't know if the group they are allocated to will be one of the few including a man (who says he's a woman) so women for whom it matters- many survivors of male abuse- have to self exclude if they are too traumatised to take the risk.

This is easily solveable. Female only groups and mixed sex groups, with clear info on referral and websites etc and female survivors given a choice (not lying a group is female only when actually it's mixed sex). And male only groups if there's a need .