Steph Richards (TIM) again appointed to a position at endometriosis charity

[Whatchamacallitt]

The headline dishonestly implies that the issue with this appointment is because Richards is trans-identified, rather than because he is male. I wouldn't have any issue with a trans-identified woman affected by endometriosis being appointed. You'd think they would have learnt their lesson from last time when he was appointed CEO. If Richards and the charity gave a damn about women they would have taken on board the level of offence generated then.

He /him is an awful, delusional man and I’m glad he has resigned.

We massively objected to the Scottish chap who was employed as a period support officer or some such, supposed to go into schools and companies to discuss facilities and services, or something. He wasn’t trans. Just a bloke. Some jobs are best suited to a woman.

I bloody love Billy Joel.

Note that the poster doesn’t actually answer. Wonder why.

I mean, surely it’s an easy question to answer for you and pp, given that you’re so sure we’re wrong?

It's just too complicated and everyone here is a meanie.

An ICKY meanie, I think you'll find [hefts bosoms]

Is that mean average or mean mean?

No.

I just read the news that a man who had a sx change was involved in an endometriosis charity and I'm confused. I thought that was connected to women's menstrual cycles? People like that are lucky that they could legally change their gender, but trying to associate themselves to charities that involve women's parts, that they had to have an operation to create fake women's parts, seems like encouraging mental illness.
It's taking the mickey out of all women have to live with, a continuous background noise, on and offline, of many men promoting abuse & hatred of women and trying to take away our confidence, without them trying to take over women's charities and wanting all the awards of being the best women.

I don't disagree that he's a man, but why can't he work for an endometriosis charity?

I know a woman who was CEO of Prostate Cancer UK. She had a very strong commercial and financial background and was an excellent CEO. Saying that people can only work for health organisations/charities if they have experience (or potential experience) of the condition themselves is ridiculous.

Quite often those organisations need employees with particular skills: finance, marketing, comms etc. They don't need someone suffering from that condition unless they have the necessary skills.

He is a hairdresser.

An icky boom boom yeah! Got that as an ear worm now 😂😂😂😂

But he has no charity experience. He’s a hairdresser ffs!

Agreed, except none of that is applicable to him, this is not a career choice this is a fetish choice. They only reason he wants to be associated with this charity is because it's about a condition that only effects women, he wants to be associated with the condition because it adds to his women performance. Everyone he interacts with in this role will be validating his lies, and be used as unconsenting props in his sexual fantasy.

I know a woman who was CEO of Prostate Cancer UK. She had a very strong commercial and financial background and was an excellent CEO.

Whereas he has a head tilt, excellent filters, and pretends to be something he is not. He has no relevant qualifications or suitable experience.

I know a woman who was CEO of Prostate Cancer UK. She had a very strong commercial and financial background and was an excellent CEO.

She didn't choose to wear fetish gear to work though, did she @AnnaQuayRules ? She was there to do a job, with no ulterior motive.

The woman you know of is/was CEO, and had extensive experience in the management of medical charities.

This man has been appointed, now resigned, as a PR representive to talk to people, including Parliament apparently, about a condition which they can have absolutely zero experience of. Not even as much as a period pain.

There's a huge difference.

If there's a problem with a woman heading a prostate cancer charity then it's up to men to do something about it. Ironically if only Steph had any relevant experience I'd suggest he put himself forward. It would be an excellent opportunity to remind TiM that whatever they claim their brains tell the they're men and still need to have their prostates checked.

Perhaps he'd be qualified to help people undergoing chemo style their wigs, if they choose to wear them.

To all those pointing out that he was previously a hairdresser, and has no applicable skills for the role - if that's the case then I agree. But being male has nothing to do with that. I'd say the same if it was a woman.

It's fine to criticise him on that basis, but to take the position that a man can't work for a charity that's focus is on a female health condition is, in my view, wrong. If he had brilliant marketing and networking skills and was able to raise the prominence of the charity, would it still be an issue that he's male?

People who work for charities (as I have done in the past, and my husband currently does) should be appointed on their skills and experience, not their biological sex. With the exception of operational roles in women's spaces (rape crisis centres etc).

I agree @AnnaQuayRules .

And from what I can see she has had lots of relevant experience of setting up and running organisations and campaigning that would be highly transferable.

you do know that your persistence in calling this man a woman does our work for us?

1. no one is persuaded and 2. You're just providing us more opportunities to point out he's a man. There may have been some ppl who didn't know he was a man - now no one is is any doubt. It's the Streisand effect in action.

Hmm. Steph does have experience in setting up protests to silence women speaking. Organised one outside a FILIA conference where sexually abusive comments were repeatedly hurled at women delegates. I believe Steph has even written about why it's important to silence women from expressing views he disagrees with.
I'd have thought that instantly disqualified him from politically representing a charity about women's gynae health - or frankly any charity involving people.

Most men wouldn't dream of masquerading as women and then have the cheek to speak for them. At least when we mansplain or otherwise speak over women we do it as men.

Is it ok for someone to head up an Autism charity pretending that they are autistic?

If not why not?