Gransnet forums

News & politics

I'm a woman on Wednesdays

(342 Posts)
FarNorth Tue 22-May-18 21:22:29

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/meet-the-man-standing-to-be-a-labour-party-womens-officer/

Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman. Except in the Labour Party, when it’s surprisingly easy. Just ask David Lewis. David, 45, is a member of the Labour Party. After several years of supporting the party, he became a full member last year having been “inspired” by Jeremy Corbyn. Tomorrow, David will be a candidate for election as an office-holder in his Constituency Labour Party in Basingstoke. He is standing for election as women’s officer, a post that Labour rules say can only be held by a woman. David is standing for that post because he is a woman. On Wednesdays, at least. When we spoke yesterday, he put it like this:

“I self-identify as a woman on Wednesdays, between 6.50am when my alarm goes off and around midnight when I go to bed.”

What does self-identifying as a woman mean? In what way is David a woman on Wednesdays?

“My womanness is expressed by my saying ‘I self identify as a woman’ now and again on Wednesdays. I make no changes in my behaviour or my appearance. I keep my name, David and my male pronouns. I wear the same sort of clothes I wear the rest of the week. I keep my beard. I enjoy the full womanness of my beard.”

The Basingstoke Labour Party last week accepted the womanness of David and his beard. He is listed as a candidate for election as CLP Women’s Officer, a post that involves encouraging women to join the party and generally speaking for women, their concerns and their experiences. But who is a woman? In the Labour Party, among other places, the answer to that question is not always as simple as some people might expect.

Labour operates a policy of self-definition: if someone defines themselves as a woman, the party recognises that person as a woman, with no question, verification or scrutiny of that definition. This approach is intended to make the party inclusive and supportive of transwomen, people who were born male and later say they wish to change their gender and be recognised as female. Many advocates of greater legal rights for trans people say that accepting such self-identification is right and fair because “gatekeeping” checks, where trans people are required to “prove” their gender identity to another person or authority, are discriminatory and intrusive. “Transwomen are women,” they say, as if those three words are all that’s needs to settle this matter. More on this later.

The Labour approach on self-defining women also extends to the all-women shortlists used to select the party’s candidate in some parliamentary seats. Some Labour members have doubts about the policy of self-definition. Some are feminists who worry that a policy that allows male-born people (who might have enjoyed the social and economic advantages that are often associated with being male) to compete for and hold women-only posts is unfair to people who were born female (and thus prone to social and economic disadvantage.)

Some raise legal questions. Generally, equalities law doesn’t allow organisations such as Labour to reserve jobs or services for any particular group, but the Equality Act 2010 includes some exemptions for single-sex services, because Parliament wanted to ensure that women could be guaranteed that there are some roles and places where men cannot enter.

Some Labour members have sought to bring a legal challenge against the party for opening up women’s roles to “self-defined” women. They argue that where transwomen are not legally recognised as women (i.e. they do not hold a gender recognition certificate) they cannot be entitled to posts that the law reserves for women. Some women have resigned from Labour over this issue.

Labour’s NEC, meanwhile, has insisted that the policy of treating self-defined women as women will stand. Which brings us back to David Lewis, candidate to be Basingstoke Labour’s women’s officer:

“After I looked at the NEC position and what it really meant, I thought, I’ll put my name forward for women’s officer. After all, what’s the worst that could happen? I expected them to say, ‘don’t be silly’ and politely decline my application. But they didn’t. They accepted my candidacy as valid.”

So he’s standing for a woman’s post. Why?

“My priority here is to inform the CLP, and maybe some other people, about what this policy means, about what happens when you say that someone’s gender depends only on what they say and nothing else.”

How would David respond to those who might say he is being offensive or bigoted, that he is trivialising the issues that transgender women face?

“I’d say those people don’t have any right to criticise my gender-identity. If I say I am a woman on Wednesdays, then all they can do is accept that. After all, there are other people who only identify as women on some days of the week and not others, and they are accepted, not criticised.”

David adds:

“In any case, anyone else’s criticism or questions about my gender identity are just not relevant to the Labour Party at the moment, given the current policy. If I say I’m a woman, I’m a woman.”

Now, if you’re new to this topic, you may by this point have come to appreciate that yes, in today’s Labour Party, anyone can be a woman if they say they are a woman, even David with his beard and his complete lack of any outward effort to live or pass as a woman. And maybe you might think “Yes, well, that’s the loony lefty SJW Labour Party, and nothing to do with the rest of us who aren’t part of it.”

If so, you’d be wrong, because that policy of “self-identification” could become the law for everyone. The Government will shortly bring forward a consultation on amending the law on gender recognition, where some groups will argue that people should be able to define themselves as a woman or a man (and thus obtain the associated legal rights and entitlements) without external check or verification.

Some people think that’s a good idea, because they say the current system institutionalises unfairness to trans people. Some people have doubts, because they worry that such rules could be (ab)used to erode the legal status of women, opening up their roles, jobs and places (for instance, domestic violence shelters, all-women colleges, hospital wards) to people with male socialisation and anatomy.

Many (but not all) of the people who raise questions about self-identified gender rules are women, women who are struggling to make their voices heard in what passes for the public debate about gender, because those who speak out are at risk of abuse and accusations of transphobic bigotry. Or even being assaulted.

Which is why what David Lewis is doing strikes me as important and worthy of attention beyond the lovely town of Basingstoke. David Lewis is a man standing for a post that the rules say should be open only to women. He can do so purely because he has said the words “I am a woman” and rigid adherence to the orthodoxy of “transwomen are women” means no one can question his claim. And if anyone who says “I am a woman” must be treated as a woman and granted the status and rights of a woman, does the word “woman” still have any meaning? You do not, I submit, need to a radical feminist to see that the logic of complete self-identification raises some quite profound questions.

Although I worry he’ll get his share of abuse for it, I think David Lewis deserves praise for what he is doing. He is standing for a woman’s job to make a point about what can happen to women when rules that affect them and their rights are made and enforced on the basis of blind dogma, not balanced debate. “We need to be able to debate this, we need to be able to talk about this without being told we are transphobic and to shut up,” David says, before adding:

“I completely understand the problems that trans people face and I can see the case for reforming a system that some people find difficult and undignified. But I think we have to have a proper debate where both sides are heard and there are people who raising valid questions who are not being heard. In the end, we need to have a compromise. And a good compromise is one where both sides are equally unhappy.”

Does he think there is any chance he might actually win his election and end up being elected as women’s officer? “I am hoping that my local party will be sensible.”

SueDonim Wed 30-May-18 21:49:23

Trisher, you don't seem to understand that it is' born' women who are having to budge up on the bench to allow tranwomen to take our space. How can you have categories such as all-female short lists or equal pay & opportunities for women when there is no longer any definition of what a woman is? The Green Party already talks of men and non-men. Do you really want to be regarded as a nonperson?

Why shouldn't born women be able to speak of menstruation, pregnancy and abortion without being accused of being TERFs? Why should lesbians have to endure accusations of transphobia because they don't want to have sex with a transwoman with a 'lady penis'.

You seem to think these are small concerns. A quick look online will inform you that they are not small worries.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 20:46:42

Falmer I have just re-read your post and frankly I am shocked. You misunderstand the demands of disabled people. You want trans people to be classified as disabled-a term even disabled people dislike and many refuse to use. You are in favour of complete segregation which has never been the aim of disability rights activists. They demanded facilities so they were able to compete in sports at a high level not so they were seperate. And many successful sports people with a disability are now seeking to compete in sports at the same level as everyone else.
Segragation is wrong and it doesn't work.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 20:29:59

Falmeryou may see something but what you see is not reality or indeed what you mistakenly imagine. Name calling may be very satisfying for you but it doesnt really constitute an argument does it? Or perhaps it does for you..
Having lived a long independent life and not being dependant on any man I think I probably have far more experience in matters than you imagine and a far longer involvement in women's activism.
But carry on. I will continue to assert that everyone matters, that no-one has the right to condemn anyone else to a life of pain and misery and that the fight for women's rights consists of far more than blaming trans women for everything. And that the establishment of human rights for everyone is more important than anything else

Falmer Wed 30-May-18 18:54:31

We see you.

Falmer Wed 30-May-18 18:53:21

Wow! The handmaidens will really stop at nothing to suck up to their masters. Disgusting!

trisher Wed 30-May-18 18:33:51

Of course some men are misogynistic, of course some women hate men and the same can be said for trans women and trans men. But that doesn'tmean they all are. And if someone can explain to me how this self identification is going to remove any of the rights I have now I would like to know which. We've dealt with medical examination-you. can ask for someon else without giving a reason. Which leaves single sex places and quite honestly I think they will remain with a small amount of use by trans gender people.
I see that the true nature of the debate is now emerging. That people are not to be allowed to change their gender but are to be put in a seperate category and labelled for ever as different. Or to be considered as 'disabled' a term by the way disability rights campaigners dislike. Now that's prejudice!!!

FarNorth Wed 30-May-18 18:26:39

Looking at it another way, let's suppose it becomes commonplace to see transwomen like Alex Drummond and Danielle Muscato in female changing rooms and toilets, taking part in sports, applying for scholarships etc that were set up for girls and women.
Do you think it likely that some men, who are not transwomen at all, will start to take advantage of that?

www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/07/19/this-trans-woman-wants-to-widen-the-bandwidth-of-gender-by-keeping-her-beard/

SueDonim Wed 30-May-18 18:21:08

I agree 100% with you, Maryeliza. When women are told that its transphobic to talk about pregnant women and breastfeeding and that suffering from such awful conditions as endometriosis is a cis-privilege, it's misogyny writ large.

Falmer Wed 30-May-18 18:19:13

That's it mary. It's all about them and no care whatsoever for women and girls.

maryeliza54 Wed 30-May-18 18:12:08

I can’t help but feel Falmer that this is a misogynistic backlash to try and put uppity women back in their box

Falmer Wed 30-May-18 18:05:09

I wonder why tra's and their handmaidens do want to encroach into womens/girls spaces and sports? Even though they know that a number of transwomen, women and girls don't want this? Disabled people lobbied for their own spaces, sports, swimming sessions. They didn't encroach on others. Autistic people now have their own swimming sessions, cinema showings, sen education, supported living. Yet tra's don't want to lobby for their own spaces, choosing instead to injure, upset, silence women and girls, taking away their rights. Wonder why?

SueDonim Wed 30-May-18 17:42:37

The size of a problem doesn't matter. In any case, as SI has yet to occur, we have no idea of what will happen, number-wise.

The main issue is that the hard-won sex-based rights for women that are currently in place will be erased if there is no longer a biological definition of woman.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 16:28:47

FarNorth I believe much the same comments were made about apartheid

trisher Wed 30-May-18 16:26:05

In other words they must always be different FarNorth.
Trans gender people want to be accepted and not made to feel they are somehow different, they have enough problems without adding more. If there are trans men in men's spaces why not? if there are trans women in women spaces why not?. As I have already said it won't impact much on our lives. It will just be a small number of people who have had many difficulties and deserve to be accepted.

FarNorth Wed 30-May-18 16:15:11

"I don't care if they are trans gender men or women. They have a right to feel they belong somewhere."

They don't have a right to take over single-sex spaces for themselves to feel comfortable in, while making others very uncomfortable.

They have a right to campaign for their own spaces to belong in.

FarNorth Wed 30-May-18 16:07:53

'Real feminists' are already active in this, trisher. I'm surprised you don't know that.

FarNorth Wed 30-May-18 16:05:03

If someone, woman or man, has an opinion about this matter, they are entitled to hold that opinion regardless of whether they call themselves feminist or not and regardless of whether they have some kind of feminist credentials or not.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 14:54:55

What I'm saying is that some women have jumped on the bandwagon not because they have any strong feminist principles not because they actively care about women but because they actually have a very narrow and restricted view. Now I don't think all of the women involved are like this, but I do think some are. I support and campaign first for human rights and then for women's rights. And some posting on this thread show little support for either. It isn't helpful or supportive to condemn and vilify a whole section of society just because there are activists who use violence to further their aims.
I have real problems with the message being sent out by this campaign which,much as some may wish it didn't, does say to trans gender people, that they cannot be accepted for what they are, but must always consider themseves as different. And I don't care if they are trans gender men or women. They have a right to feel they belong somewhere.

minesaprosecco Wed 30-May-18 13:21:04

To clarify, by trans activism I mean the extreme activism which seeks to put the right of self identification before the rights of women, not the activism which seeks to ensure transgender people are treated with dignity and respect - they are very different forms of activism.

SueDonim Wed 30-May-18 13:14:33

Whataboutery isn't an argument, Trisher. That's just trying to displace the discussion at hand. I might just as well say 'what about women who live under repressive regimes, aren't they more important than equal pay/opportunity issues here?'

minesaprosecco Wed 30-May-18 12:58:50

Illogical argument trisher - what you're saying is that (a) other women's issues are more important than (b) trans activism, therefore (b) does not need to be addressed. You're also saying that anyone who is not involved with fighting (a) should not be involved with fighting (b). In my view, a person can be involved in fighting for any one of, or all of, women's rights (or any other rights) and shouldn't have to say which ones they are to justify why they are fighting for any of them.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 11:46:37

Just pointing out that being a "feminist" consists of more than just opposing one piece of legislation and that the real feminists would surely already be active in the field. But I accept TerriBull that some aren't, and never have been, active feminists but are simply using the issue to pursue their own prejudices. Otherwise why not tell?
I'm proud to be a member of 50/50 and to actively support the WASPI women although I'm not the right age.
Jon here 5050parliament.co.uk

TerriBull Wed 30-May-18 11:34:07

I don't see the relevance of asking posters to declare what other feminist issues they have or are involved in Trisher, how is that any of your business anyway? As far as I am aware asserting one's self as a feminist is not a prerequisite to having an opinion on prospective legislation that will have serious and negative implications for women.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 11:27:09

No I don't mind anyone being a bigot I simply don't want to be linked or associated with them in anyway. They can stay as bigotted as they like. I'm perfectly willing to tolerate them just not join them.

trisher Wed 30-May-18 11:24:35

Name calling and condemnation. If you can't destroy the argument attack the poster. Have I "apologised for TRA activists"? I condemned all violence theirs included.