My WI group folded this week

[Mauvish1]

The vote in my WI group was 4:1 against signing the new WI declaration, which would have obliged us to sign that we agreed with the WI upholding the law on being single sex (well yes, obviously!) but also that we agreed that TWAW and should be allowed to join, if only the pesky lawmakers hadn't clarified biological sex for the hard of understanding.

The person from the NFWI who was there to oversee our suspension told us that it was obvious from our refusing to sign that we all had friends or loved ones who were trans! This produced a roar of dissent! She also told us that if we left the WI, we would each be a lone voice to whom no-one listened. The look on everyone's face as she patronised us was a sight to behold.

Comparisons were made with brownies, and some people felt that the WI and brownies should simply open doors to men and boys - but there are plenty of other mixed sex groups to join, and very few other female-only groups.

So, another WI group bites the dust, and it's not the only one in my area.

You were all doing the real work of running your local group. It’s harder without an umbrella organization, but if you act quickly, you won’t lose momentum.

If enough small groups keep going they could eventually join together

What?

I was really hoping there was some crossed wires here. What was the wording of the form? (If you don't mind me asking)

Good for you for setting up another group.

Let them disband then reform it.

The membership form to sign before we renew and pay next years fees is to confirm we are women. But it also commits us to following the policies, and in my group the only policy that has been circulated with the form is the equality and diversity policy which includes the lines

“Although our membership is only open to women registered
female at birth (biological women), we offer different ways to engage with our
movement so that we can offer support and fellowship to a wider group, including transgender women and others. Our inclusion of transgender women in activities
outside of membership is based on our belief that being a woman is about biology and
lived experience..” and also “ Highlight and celebrate the diverse membership of the WI, and ensure that our
wider movement offers support and fellowship to all women, including
transgender women, and others.”

and so they have managed to piss off both sides of the debate.

My group meet tonight, I’m not sure if it will be mentioned. I’d just about decided to stay, partly to support my local group which is v important to a group of elderly women, and to fight from inside. But then I read those lines again and really don’t know if I can have any of my money go to national to spend on this.

Sorry for confusion - largely borne of the fact that I was typing on my phone whilst watching over a 2 year old!

@tesseractor has it nailed.

My group has no trans members (or if there are, they have not let on and have passed extremely successfully!). Therefore we can all sign to say that we are biological women (though we wonder why we have to confirm that every year since it's not going to change).

But we would also be signing that we agree with the WI stance on TW, which is as @tesseractor has copied out above.

AFAIK no-one in my group believes that a TW is indeed a W and in that respect we are all GC. We were then split between those who wouldn't mind if men became members, and those who would mind. (There were also a couple of women who clearly hadn't realised that the WI's hand has been forced by the law).

Everyone was also mightily p'd off with the national federation for trying to push this through so quickly without involving and informing the grassroots membership. Obviously they have to comply with the law by 1 April but there has been no attempt to try to debate their wording of this with the membership; even the most recent magazine, a couple of weeks ago, included 1 paragraph with promise of more "on p27" - and there was NOTHING more on p27 or indeed anywhere else.

I am most concerned that the "be kind" lobby, and others with less benign intentions, will spin this as people leaving in droves because TW are no longer allowed; in fact I have seen an article stating this exactly in the Guardian (where else?!). It's actually the opposite; my group, and probably others, felt unable to sign because we DON'T believe that TWAW.

And this is the bit that really boggles me:

Our inclusion of transgender women in activities outside of membership is based on our belief that being a woman is about biology and lived experience..”

now which part of "biology and lived experience" applies to a TW?!

This is bonkers!

Would you have realised that this was being stealthed in if you hadn't thought to look for it? I'm just wondering whether women are signing and not realising what they're agreeing to?

Yes I think he would be

In the end I signed because HQ clarified it was to confirm my biological sex and I’m not willing to let their ridiculous nonsense rob me of the company of a lovely bunch of women. I made it absolutely clear in my email to them that I don’t want males in the WI and that many women are relieved that the WI is finally complying with the law.

The policy statement is all about trying to appease the TRAs that have already infiltrated the organisation. They confirm that GC views are protected by law so they absolutely cannot discriminate against people who are sex realists.

I guess what clinched it for me is that the argument is won and they have to comply with the law. No amount of word salading and silliness can change that.

I wasn’t willing to sign anything that WI HQ could count as proof that women don’t want women only spaces and are happy to have TW join.

i don’t trust what they’d do with that.

Can you agree to sign the first bit and cross out the rest - if on paper?
Alternative would be to refuse to sign online form and send in a letter to HQ - be v old fashioned and groups swamp them with post?

I don’t know much about th WI but if you refused to sign and just met up as a private group and did the same things what would be the difference?

The difficulty with this is that I suspect most of the women in my group are a bit oblivious about the issue. It’s a village group in a semi rural and fairly traditional area and we have almost nothing to do with the national stuff, so I’m not sure it’s on anyone’s radar.

I really sympathise with the OP and others who sense there is a level of manipulation going on, hence why I contacted HQ to ask them exactly what we were signing for. The reply was explicit that it was confirmation of eligibility on the basis of sex. In the end I was not willing to leave my group, something I actually feel I really need at the moment (a whole other story) when the substantive issue is resolved - men can no longer identify into the WI.

Slippery weasels. I'm appalled.

Had not realised that WI HQ (or whever is doing this) should do anything so underhand (and I would imagine on one level not legal) to demand that you have to agree that TWAW to then say yes the WI should follow the law.

Which apart from anything else implies WI HQ is saying the law is wrong because they (and all who sign) are saying TWAW which the court have ruled they aren't!

And this is being done in public and no one is challenging them.

So many of the threads on FWR seem to be about core positions within groups being captured and then from that position of priviledge and power the trans agenda is promoted.

I am sure if it were possible to find someone with a legal back ground prepared to make a public statement, that by imposing this condition WI HQ is breaching its position.

Can't you cross out the bit you don't agree with and then sign?

Not the first democratic decision I disagree with, as I can do in a democracy.

Have the members decided to form any alternative group, say the Thursday meeting club or something, OP?

I hope the media will pick this up and run with it. It needs to be absolutely clear that if WI groups are folding or devolving from the organisation, it is not because members are outraged at the expulsion of trans identified males, but that they are being instructed to sign a statement that includes a clause pledging support for an ideology to which the majority of members of that particular group do not subscribe. And the WI (and, for the future, the transactivist wing of Girlguiding) need to know that they can't sneak stuff like this past us.

Apparently there is a financial issue with this. I'm sorry, I don't know the details but I think it's something to do with if your group is in credit (fees, donations etc) and the group disbands, it has to hand over all monies to NFWI (!)
I'll see if I can find out more about this.

There is an insurance issue too, but I would've thought that was something that could be dealt with fairly easily.

now which part of "biology and lived experience" applies to a TW?!

I suppose in Uptonspeak, we are all biological, and alive, and have experiences of that.

I am a WI member. This is correct

Yes, our financial credit has been taken over by the NFWI and we cannot access it. Given that some of the moneys were raised for a named charity and hadn't yet been handed over, I think that is extremely dodgy.

The money is apparently ringfenced for up to 3 years (I think) and if another group in our area starts up in that time, they can apply for our funds.

WRT to having a group that isn't under the WI umbrella, we are discussing that. But there are potential issues regarding any subs (to pay for speakers, activities etc, meeting places etc), liability insurance etc etc.

Create your own group. We broke away from our original women's group and founded our own

Given that WI is a charity (registered educational charity (charity number: 803793 in England & Wales, apparently), I'd feel like reporting the NFWI to the Charity Commission for playing fast and loose with monies raised for other charities at a local level.

See how the NFWI likes them apples.

ETA typo

The issue for the WI is that their old policy (the mealy mouthed nonsense "living as a woman") has now quite rightly been declared illegal. But they could have men "LAAW" who they allowed to join, which now can't be allowed. So we all have to sign (just one time I think) to say that we are actual women. I don't really give a shit what support the "be nice" brigade want to offer outside of membership because all the activities arranged are for members only and always have been. And I won't be going on any TWAW bollocks so that's fine. Because TWAM.

So your group are all in agreement

But you are not allowed to set up as officially part of the WI? Have I got that right? Because if you did all agree then I can't see why it would have to be private invitation only - unless it's just that the WI won't let it continue in its current form.

So generally, it sounds like the official position of the WI is that they do not want to be women only.

once again, as with the last 22 years, I wonder what I'm missing.

@Mauvish1 do you think there's someone in the group who passes? Or do you think it's part of a broader mission for the WI?