Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

Who's stopping them speaking? They've got a huge article in The Guardian that gives them the floor with no dissenting comments from the women who are glad of the ruling.

As far as I know, the WI have never consulted their own members about whether they wished to allow men to be members, they railroaded it through without asking the women. So they didn't exactly 'let women speak'.

It only takes a few activists to change the direction of an organisation.

The inverted argument appears again, but this example is the perfect example of a self-defeating argument. And there are the unsubstantiated claims.

What matters is what is being said in this moment ... that WI branches are closing through collapsing membership since the trans ban. This is women voting with their feet. You just need to listen.

The argument that the WI took a few activists in the organisation is for the birds. I already pointed out the obvious. Why would trans activists get themselves to the top of the organisation and use that influence to ban trans people?

This is system collapse for your set of arguments.

 

[mickle]

View attachment 13161

Quiten down - I'm speaking with your owner.

Spoken like a true gentleman.

 

[AuroraSaab]

They didn't have any choice after the sc ruling. The influence of activists, however strong, doesn't allow them to flout the law, especially if that opened the organisation to possible legal action. The WI have rightly acted to be compliant with the law.

They're acting to provide groups that will allow men to join (I'll be interested in how many women join those if there's a man free group available). Those women in the article could consult their local members and convert to being one of these groups.

The WI have used Gendered Intelligence for staff training, who promote the 'Stonewall law' interpretation of the Equality Act that claims men can access women's spaces, and at one point had a trans identifying male on the membership committee. At no point have they asked national members what they think.

 

[CXRAndy]

WI branches are closing through collapsing membership since the trans ban

Wow, there must have been more TiM in the WI.

 

[monkers]

They didn't have any choice after the sc ruling. The influence of activists, however strong, doesn't allow them to flout the law, especially if that opened the organisation to possible legal action. The WI have rightly acted to be compliant with the law.

They're acting to provide groups that will allow men to join (I'll be interested in how many women join those if there's a man free group available). Those women in the article could consult their local members and convert to being one of these groups.

The WI have used Gendered Intelligence for staff training, who promote the 'Stonewall law' interpretation of the Equality Act that claims men can access women's spaces, and at one point had a trans identifying male on the membership committee. At no point have they asked national members what they think.

What you are now freely saying is that gender critical activism has resulted in is the loss of freedom of association for WI people with people they wish to.

You are saying this because your belief is that the SC made that ruling.

You are defending this with invention. There is not and never has been ''Stonewall Law''.

There were statutory guidelines that had been in place since 2010 which precedes any interest by Stonewall.

WI women are clearly most unhappy with your 'achievement' of choosing their friendship groups for them.

There is interference with their fundamental rights.

UNDHR Article 20:

• Voluntary Participation: The right includes both the freedom to join an association and the freedom to leave one.
• No Compulsion: Individuals cannot be forced to join any association.
• Scope: This covers, but is not limited to, trade unions, political parties, and other organizations formed for common interests.
• Purpose: It is an enabling right, essential for allowing individuals to defend their interests and participate in social, economic, and political life.

ECHR Article 11:

• Core Rights: Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, covering both organizing and joining groups.

 

[monkers]

I'm not seeing responses from those I ignore, but I well imagine that the drones have hurty feelings and are circling to protect their Queen.

 

[spen666]

Strangely, I'm not seeing any references to "sovereign status"

Any idea why?

 

[TailWindHome]

Are the trials on puberty blockers not a recommendation of the Cass Report?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Are the trials on puberty blockers not a recommendation of the Cass Report?

Yes.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Are the trials on puberty blockers not a recommendation of the Cass Report?

This gives a good overview of Cass position

BBC News - Children 'weaponised' in toxic trans debate, Cass says - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k1vkmxgd6o?app-referrer=deep-link

 

[mickle]

Upton has effed off to Oz apparently. 400,000 of taxpayer's ££ later.

 

[CXRAndy]

Money well spent NHS Fife 》£400k in legal costs

It seems DrUpton has left the building and country.

All because he couldn't get access to women's changing rooms.

Seems Australia likely, they've gone far woke than the UK

 

[Bromptonaut]

If Upton's left the country that's no surprise. No finding against them by the Employment Tribunal but I guess there comes a point where a new start is needed.

NHS Fife's costs are entirely down to their own bone headed failure to follow due (ie their own) processes.

Not that there's anything unusual there with employers......

 

[mickle]

If Upton's left the country that's no surprise. No finding against them by the Employment Tribunal but I guess there comes a point where a new start is needed.

NHS Fife's costs are entirely down to their own bone headed failure to follow due (ie their own) processes.

Not that there's anything unusual there with employers......

Them? How many Dr Uptons are there?

 

[AuroraSaab]

Cass knows the evidence for benefit from putting children on puberty blockers is very weak. I think she felt it was a step too far to ban outright all in one go.

This isn't like testing diabetes or cancer drugs.
Doctors can't even agree a definition or how to diagnose 'gender identity'. They have no way of knowing which children might benefit (if any will) from puberty blockers.

The danger is that they concretise a transgender identity. Without medication it might have been a passing phase or a gay or non conforming child who reconciles to their sex or orientation with maturity.

Let's remember why the Dutch clinics started using puberty blockers. It was because adult men didn't like how they looked. They thought by giving male children puberty blockers it would produce smaller, more slightly built adult men who might 'pass' more convincingly. That's the reason. Kids weren't queuing up demanding them until they were offered by clinics and the blockers-or- suicide narrative started being pushed by activists.