Endometriosis Charity Slams Transphobic Reaction

[The_DADDY 3,478]

....to appointing trans woman as CEO.

An endometriosis charity has criticised what it called the "transphobic" reaction of some people after it announced a trans woman as their new CEO.

 

Endometriosis South Coast has been forced to defend the appointment of Steph Richards, citing her "decades of experience in women's healthcare".

 

The 71-year-old tweeted "calmly working today while under a barrage of online transphobia" after the charity made her role public.

 

Endometriosis is a condition where tissue similar to the lining of the womb grows in other places (like the ovaries and fallopian tubes) often causing pain, heavy periods, and in some cases making it difficult to get pregnant.

 

 

https://www.itv.com/news/2023-11-14/endometriosis-charity-slams-transphobic-reaction-to-new-trans-ceo

 

Clown world strikes again?

[Mister M 1,627]

If the candidate chosen is able to do the job better than other candidates, why discriminate against them on the grounds of their identity? 

Wouldn't that be against the Equality Act? 

The issue here isn't the candidate chosen for the job, but those who spent their day subjecting her to barrage of online abuse.

Perhaps if they spent a bit more time concentrating on their own lives, than having a go at someone for who they are, then maybe they'd be happier and more secure in themselves.

[Jomie 30]

This was a voluntary post for a tiny charity with a comparatively low annual income.  If the role is mainly administrative and a man was the best candidate for the job then that would perhaps not be the problem.
 

In this case, the furore is about this particular person’s background. Richards is a well known trans rights activist with a litany of egregious comments on social media, as well as being active in protesting at women’s events. Richards has no respect for women and their need for single sex spaces, fully intending to enter wherever Richards pleases.  The job will no doubt satisfy Richards’ desire for validation. Unfortunately it’s not respecting the women who suffer from this awful illness. They should not be used as a tool to satisfy Richards’ feelings. 
 

More information about Richards can be found here.  This person was interviewed by Emma Barnett on last Wednesday’s ‘Woman’s Hour’. It’s about 22 minutes in on the Sounds app. Well worth listening to if anyone is interested. It was a so-called ‘car crash’ interview. Emma was great. 

[horribleblob 213]

I've just listened to the interview. Barnett is, as usual, tenacious and on top of her brief.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001scsj

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Jomie said:

Emma was great

 

7 hours ago, horribleblob said:

Barnett is, as usual, tenacious and on top of her brief.

No, no, no.  She was a bully, according to Labour MP Ben Bradshaw.  Which is, of course, an entirely apt description for someone who, for example, can't quite keep a note of incredulity out of her voice when she questions the absence of the words 'women' and 'woman' from the charity's literature, and the statement that 'we need to move away from endometriosis as a gynaecological issue'.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Jomie said:

In this case, the furore is about this particular person’s background. Richards is a well known trans rights activist with a litany of egregious comments on social media, as well as being active in protesting at women’s events. Richards has no respect for women and their need for single sex spaces, fully intending to enter wherever Richards pleases.

Richards is apparently quite the piece of work.  I was particularly taken with the tweet about 'seeing in hell' women who want to maintain single-sex spaces.

[cressida 1,575]

What has she got against single sex spaces?  She seems like a person with a selfish agenda.

[Jomie 30]

Richards has a website, previously called ‘Steph’s Place’, now renamed. It serves as a vehicle for Richards’ misogynist views, aggressive male entitlement and jealousy of biological women. Behaviour like this is not unusual, particularly in the case of heterosexual, late transitioning  men. And people wonder why women don’t want them in single sex spaces.
 

Quote

Richards is apparently quite the piece of work.

There is no treatment for undoing male size advantage and masculine sense of entitlement. Recent events in Rossington, Doncaster highlights this - Women’s football teams refuse to play after transgender player injures opponent.  This 31 year old male bodied person actually thinks that it’s ok for them to play against young girls of 15/16 years old. They are planning to take legal action because because other clubs have refused to play Rossington. So now we have the situation where volunteers are having to suffer the stress of legal action due to withdrawal (for safety reasons) from matches in which Needham is playing. 

Quote Mr M: 

If the candidate chosen is able to do the job better than other candidates, why discriminate against them on the grounds of their identity? 

Wouldn't that be against the Equality Act? 

The issue here isn't the candidate chosen for the job, but those who spent their day subjecting her to barrage of online abuse.

Perhaps if they spent a bit more time concentrating on their own lives, than having a go at someone for who they are, then maybe they'd be happier.

Reducing womanhood to a costume is frankly dehumanising and merely performative. No one can change sex.  Hormones, fake breasts and  fake vagina do not a woman make. It’s frankly quite insulting. They want women’s bodies, single sex spaces, sports and all women shortlists. Funny how they don’t want women’s oppression and visceral fear of being in an enclosed space with a strange male bodied person.
 

Mr M - Richards is no shrinking violet and gives as good as they get, online and off. The interview with Emma demonstrated that. You seem to conflate transgenderism with the battle for gay rights but this is completely different (perhaps you could do some research re the veracity of this).  
  Edited November 21, 2023 by Jomie

[Jomie 30]

Edit to previous post:  Sorry, I made a mistake in the aforementioned quote but cannot edit it. The last paragraph “Reducing womanhood …..” should have appeared after the quote, not part of it.  I apologise for the mistake.