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.

Reading the article I've just linked upthread reminded me of this comment I read below an article in Unherd. Apologies to the person who posted, I've forgotten their name or I'd credit them

I think the Queer Left are like Tolkien’s orcs in that they cannot create. They can only mock, pervert, and twist truths and ideas. They’re miserable husks raging at the strong and the good.

Yes. It just astounds me. If some women wanted a "like the WI, but with trans women" or "like the WI but mixed sex" they could always have set that up.

But it wasn't the activity of the social group that was important to them in reality, it was that "women" had to include TW. So like a cuckoo or a parasite wasp, only the already existing WI would do.

You have to agree to follow their Code of Conduct and ED&I policy (which they can change whenever they feel like it)
Up till now, we've only had to abide by our Constitution - which is perfectly reasonable

The members of my institute know what is being asked of them but they just want our very successful, very happy group to continue

So they've signed

Unless NFWI publish the figures (unlikely) we'll never know the true outcome

We never usually have to sign a form when we renew our membership but because they've finally accepted that they were breaking the law (as we are a charity and therefore could be women-only as per our Constitution) they've rewritten it - with all that added guff, We only have to sign in once, never again. But no sign=no membership

They are starting Sisterhood groups (yes, really) open to anyone and everyone, of whatever sex/gender they are. They're supposed to be a sub-group of any existing WI that wants one - just like Book clubs or lunch groups or craft groups. And self- funding.

Will be interesting to see what happens

They can if they allow actual men and put it to the vote.

I'll vote with my feet...

No, I don’t think so. I don’t think there’s a lawful way to create a charity to benefit that combination of protected characteristics. Even if the entire membership, the trustees, the privy council and the King all wanted it.

Although I disagree the the people Unherd labels the Queer Left don't create. There are wonderful creative spaces in art, music and suchlike where LGB and gender non-conformism is part of the energy and aesthetic.

It's partly why the whole TRA thing breaks my heart, because that positive instinct has been misdirected into something like looks superficially progressive but is actually sexist, regressive and limiting (not to mention in many cases physically damaging). And with it, a movement for acceptance and hedonism has turned in one of paranoia and rage.

In fact if I were feeling psychoanalisy, I might wonder whether the rage is really because of the subconscious knowledge that this is wrong and that genderism is sexist, illogical and internally contradictory, and the rage is really the discomfort of that cognitive dissonance turned outwards rather than facing what the mind knows internally to be true.

I'm not sure what activities we do that are open to non-members.

Usually a WI sub-group is only open to members of that WI - a 'perk' if you like

They're trying to steamroller over everything.

I wonder how our (volunteer) national trustees really feel about all this - it's very much led by our CEO

They'll change our Constitution - then they can

We'll be a U3A mark 2

They will have to change the Equality Act 2010 first. As far as I can see any charitable purpose to benefit women and some men is unlawful discrimination.

It has been hinted in newspaper articles that Labour intends to ammend the EA "to do away with "anomalies" ie that Labour thought they had stitched it up for TW by creating the concept of legal sex (those with a GRC).

If this did happen the Supreme Court ruling would no longer apply although it would mean that only one protected characteristic, sex, could be negated by another (gender re-assignment).

I wonder if you can have a constitution that is based on "identifying" as a woman. This is probably what WI HQ wants as it would be an even greater member pool. ie not just those on the pathway to or having a GRC. That's only 10,000 people. Just think how big the membership could be if was based on "identifying"

Oh it is just self - identify : the previous criteria was “living as a woman” however you want to interpret that . And a situation last year showed that it didn’t even have to be permanently either . Turn up in a dress for WI things in your female name and you are fine regardless of what you do the rest of the week . ……

The simplest solution from the WI perspective would be to make it open to all.

They would have to change their charitable objects first

But not for the women who go who want it to be women only to run themselves.

And no longer a safe space for traumatised women nor those from
culy where a woman only organisation is simpler.

Yes. They would have to change them to benefit everyone. But at least that would be legal.

when I said “simplest” I didn’t mean simple. Just the least complex.

i don’t think it’s a good idea, or should be done. But they are hell bent on having men join that’s how they could do it.

The least complex way forward would be to stay as a woman only organisation and apply the EA correctly

Oh no. Sisterhood groups are for EVERYONE. Because of that

Why is this becoming so contraversial. Surely people can set up groups that are inclusive of TW without it being part of the WI, if they feel that strongly about it.

Why do you have to sign up to other things suddenly?

Because the penny has dropped that transwomen should never have been admitted.
But that has upset WIs who had trans members and those women who think transwomen are our sisiters
That includes our CEO and some trustees, hence the Sisterhood groups who will have to admit anyone and everyone whilst actual WIs will be biological women only.

But everyone who is a WI member now has to agree to their ED&I policy which still wants to promote trans acceptance and if we don't agree we can't be members. And they can change the policy to what they like because all members have agreed to support it

The Equality Act is supposed to protect us against harassment and victimisation.

26 Harassment
(1) A person (A) harasses another (B) if—
(a) A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and
(b) the conduct has the purpose or effect of—
(i) violating B's dignity, or
(ii) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/26

Can someone write to them to confirm any man can join a Sisterhood group?

Maybe people who identify as women? So get rid of all those boring people who simply are women by merit of being female and keep the ones who are willing to say they ID as it.

Just guessing here.