Reflections on trans presence at a Dykes Who Hike event

[13RidgmontRoad]

For those who don't know DWH, it's an informal mainly Instagram-promoted event and the organisers, two women in their 20s, arrange (relatively accessible) hikes in locations mainly in SE England. Cost to join is £2 a ticket. Yesterday was the first one I've been on, which was 17 miles (Newhaven to Brighton). Around 130 people attended.

There were 5-6 TW on the hike that I could see; two older chaps, one in a dress and heavy makeup, the other looking very much just like a bloke in men's clothing. Four younger ones who looked like the wind might blow them away.

Older blokey one was very annoying - lots of mansplaining on the Whatsapp group, selfies and borderline inappropriate jokes, generally ignored.

Two of the younger ones peeled off about halfway through as they couldn't cope with the rest of the distance. Remaining younger ones were a couple and kept themselves to themselves. They were rather timid and socially awkward, which was a bit of a contrast to 130 hale and hearty lesbians in hiking boots.

I felt like most of the women there just gave the lot of them a wide berth - bit of polite chat then forward or back to join other women.

The (lovely) organisers are quite young and there's absolutely no way either of them would come out and bar TW. I imagine they'd be terrified to take a view. So it seemed very much like weary acceptance. It was rather interesting to observe.

Who said it was a lesbian group? Their description says who it is for.

What does the word Dyke mean then?

Few places are tolerant of views they find discriminatory or oppressive to people they want as members

The leaders are lesbians. They are the Dykes who Hike.

So men can never be the leaders then?

Well they can't go back in time and become the founders/organisers of the group because we don't have that type of technology as of yet

So the group ceases to exist if the only leaders give up then? There’s no way of any others who are non binary or men to be leaders?

I don't know what the organisers will decide if they ever stop. I don't know them personally.

Doesn’t seem very inclusive after all then.

Why because I can't answer whether they'd consider someone other than a biological woman who identifies that way to step into their role as organisers should they ever wish to stop leading this group?

Again what does the word Dyke mean?

Maybe if someone other than a lesbian took it over, they'd rename it to something else. Maybe they wouldn't in tribute to the founders. Who knows? They probably dont even know because it is thriving and there is no reason to stop.

Pretty misleading name for the group though right if it includes males?

You seem very upset that this thriving group isn't capitulating to your own world view. Have you considered therapy?

No, because the organisers are dykes who hike and additionally believe TWAW going by their SM.

It's not inclusive of lesbians who are only attracted to other women and don't want to be pressured into dating biological men, however. It excludes exclusively same-sex attracted women.

you don’t think it’s misleading for a dyke group to include males? Seems like you’re the one that needs help here.

I think anyone going along to a dyke group would think it’s only lesbians. Not that the leaders are lesbians and have invited absolutely everyone including males.

But this is apparently not the case here as 130 people (overwhelming majority women);are turning up and the equivalent bio women only group is not attracting the same turn out.

And it says clearly everywhere that they are inclusive of several LGBTQ identities.

Yeah. I don't really get why this is a big deal. I get why the issue with hospital wards or women's refuges but this is a totally public hobby, with a group that clearly advertise themselves to attract a particular market (which is the wider LGBTQ+ community), there are single sex alternatives available, and the people who are turning up are clearly aware of what they are getting and are happy with it.

It seems like an example of the system working. GC women are not losing out on anything (as there is a single sex option elsewhere) and people who want an inclusive group have theirs. Isn't that good for everyone?

But groups cant legally discriminate on the basis of belief. Any more than they can say 'no Catholics'.

They can choose to exclude someone who chooses to try and make people they want to be present feel unwelcome.

No, but they can say (for example) 'this is the Jewish Young Hikers, all food will be kosher, please don't bring your non kosher food along, show respect to our beliefs, don't try and convert anyone by talking about Jesus' or 'this is the Richard Dawkins fan club. We expect all members to be respectful and not turn up and declare that all atheists are going to hell'.

Therapy? No. Lexicology? Yes.

This thread is thriving because there's interest in words, particularly those referring to women, being used contrary to their standard meaning, and why people do that.
The discussion has revealed some interesting explanations.

I hope the mixed membership of the group continue to enjoy their hikes.

It would be logical for the name of the group to be descriptive of the actual membership of the group, because words carry meaning, and meaning has to be standardised and shared for communication to work efficiently.
Otherwise anything can mean anything.