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

Dear Kevin,

Women wanting the law upheld are not "transphobic".
We are concerned about men - however they identify - in our spaces.

Yours
TiP

He alleges that we are "self-identified 'anti-trans activists'".

Nobody on this thread self-identified that way so that is both an outrageous lie and very ironic coming from a member of the "respect people's identities are what they say they are" cult.

Usual replies on there from people who have either lost touch with reality or are deliberately pushing misinformation ("marriage camps" and "genocide").

Misogynistic bully.

Why does LinkedIn allow misogynistic abuse to be posted?

BP's conduct is enabling and emboldening misogynistic abusers like him and the people in his replies.

Hi Kevin,
In which other contexts would you support &/ or advise charities to break the law by disregarding the Supreme Court & their own Governing Documents?
Please provide an exhaustive list & show your reasoning.

Kev, start your own charities. We want our stuff back!

with the seen in health foi of all trusts, and the WRN foi of all local authorities, it would be good to have some similar publicity on charities.

Come on Kevin, do hop over to MN and respond to these questions - we're a friendly bunch (providing you recognise that women, girls and females doesn't inlcude anyone born with a penis, of course)

New to the thread but not to the board.... I'm happy to help as and when (lots of experience in advising charities etc).

That Linked In thread is bonkers

I would suggest this kind of behaviour is yet more evidence of a genocide against trans people. More importantly the Lemkin institute already identified a genocide against trans people in the US and UK.

Clearly no idea whatsoever what genocide means.........

Charities are not subject to FOI
but the CC is
hence my suggested wording up thread.

"Whether you are a CEO, trustee, comms lead or safeguarding professional, it's so important to understand the landscape you are operating in."

I couldn't agree with you more, Kev!

"This matters. Women’s charities are already under pressure, financially, politically and reputationally."

Again, you're spot on Kev! Nothing gets past you! They're under pressure so make sure you focus on the people they were set up for - women!

We've discussed the Lemkin institute on here before.
Two people with a laptop, identifying as an "institute". Might even be one person now, didn't one of them leave?

There seems to be a very small team now - complete with the obligatory pronouns. These mean they are to be taken Very Seriously. Their backgrounds are worth a read, if you're up for a giggle.

Oh little Kevvy in his mother's basement jerking himself of to Andrew Tate videos like the sad little woman-hating incel that he is. How DARE women have a space to ourselves. You can only wonder what the mothers of these men think. I would be ashamed if I gave birth to such a backward, hate-filled, femphobic misogynist bigot who wanted naked males in female spaces. What went wrong with his upbringing I wonder.

There is less than zero evidence of a 'gEn-Oh-ciDe' of trans people, in fact, they have the lowest rates of murder out of any group. The evidence seriously proves that transwomen are far more likely to commit murder, than be murdered. That's what the stats bear out, despite what the trans activist deceitful and denounced 'lemikins institute' says.

genocide - god these ppl are such utter dickheads

dear Kevin, your endless transperbole is why ppl are no longer listening. Women's charities are for for women, you know the boring cunty type of women. Trans ppl - rightly- have their own charities. Women want their stuff back

Golly gosh, fame at last !!!!! Shall I e mail Tanya De Grunwald? Will i get invites to appear on various YouTube channels? <faints with delusions of grandeur)

Seriously though i am not on Linkedin, it may help get the message out, to charities that we are watching them.

I have not done much apart from look at the biggies, as i have a big family issue going on but will come back when stuff has settled down.

Off to the pub to celebrate.

Snigger

His little bubble of supporters has no reach.

Oh boooo, sad times

If you scroll back i think it is obvious who Kevin appears as here.

Not going to say anymore

@Britinme does this work

Kevin & Co have taken - not unusually - an extreme angle on this.
Nobody wants services that are for women shut down. Nobody wants services that are for men shut down. Heck, if transpeople even got their act together and organised services for transpeople, we wouldn't want those shut down either.

It's just about organisations doing what it says on the tin: if they advertise themselves as being for women and girls, they should be for women and girls.
And the Supreme Court has clarified what that means: biological women and girls, not trans identifying males.

They don't have to shut down, they just have to do the job they were set up to do, in compliance with the law. Not a huge ask.

But there's another angle: many of the women working in these women and girls' organisations have been there since before the trans juggernaut rolled into town. They chose to work there precisely because they wanted to support women and girls.

They've been having to bite their lip while the original mission of the organisation was turned on its head, while they had to obey irrational rules about using the wrong pronouns, while they saw women in need of their support alienated by men as clients or even as workers, while Stonewall Law was applied instead of the actual law...
They may even have been disciplined for raising even the mildest objection to the direction their organisation had taken.

Kevin & Co. may not have been following current affairs, but several of these women have bravely stood up to their organisations and been vindicated.

So there's a good chance that women working in organisations which are currently misrepresenting themselves as being 'for women and girls' would welcome a campaign to return them to their original mission.

Brave Kevin has deleted the post.
Bless.

He's still there and he's replied to it asking for more comments.

My favourite reply is the one advising that people just opt out of using the legal definition of women. Problem solved, now the law doesn't apply to you!

"The defence to this assault is very simple, you make a policy stating that the term women in all policies applies to the charity’s terminology and not the equality act

If any segregation is deemed necessary then they will specifically use the terms of the sex assigned at birth"

Ooh, my Linkedin had glitched !

Interesting that commenters cannot see that their version of "inclusion" is actually "exclusive" and prevents some charities meeting their required objects (the WI and Girlguiding spring to mind)