Oxfam and JKR

I think there are many issues relating to the topic other than womens spaces and the issues relating to children. I think telling people that what they know is a lie is in fact the truth, well I think that has far reaching consequences. I would say the same if there was a movement to convince us the moon is made of cheese.

I don't have the answer to that, Dickens, other than the 'no debate' comes from the same stable as 'educate yourself', 'do your research', and the ridiculous 'Simples!' - it is said by people who are used to having the last word, whether in a classroom, in the home or in the workplace. It's basically saying 'I don't have to explain myself to you 🙄', or 'because I say so', and says a lot about the people saying it.

It does give the impression that they know there is no answer to the questions put forward by the so-called GC, so ignoring them or hiding behind the convenient 'No Debate' slogan is a get-out clause.

fancythat

I am a bit busy right now to reply to that. But I will at some point.

I, too, would be interested in your thoughts, and what else you think is going on!

Another thing that has occurred to me whilst I've been working in the house; some very deep thought, research and collaboration has gone into feminist thinking on trans gender matters. Scholarly articles have been written by pro trans gender individuals, they have debated, written 'manifestos', etc, and good on them for taking the time and making the effort to understand an issue which, I believe, is quite complex. Complex because it involves people's sense of self-worth, identity, and their place in society. And obviously from all this has developed the grouping, the labels - intersectional feminism, etc, etc.

But, and this is my point - why do TW women insist that there is "no debate"? The debate is ongoing - they have made their declaration - TWAW. Why, though, should they have the right to end the debate? What gives them this right? Why do their rights subsume mine? Biological men and women are a protected group - why can't I speak further? By what divine right is anyone allowed to close down debate.

I don't want to hear examples of those high-profile figures who've said "no debate" whether they be GC or IF. I've heard them - they are like those posters on SM sites who give their opinion and then declare "end of" meaning I-have-spoken-and-that's-the-end-of-the-matter.

No, it isn't. Until someone proves to me that they have the 'pipeline to the truth, the discussion continues.

I am a bit busy right now to reply to that. But I will at some point.

fancythat

It is all far far more than a man power struggle going on before our very eyes.

How do you see it, fancythat?

It is all far far more than a man power struggle going on before our very eyes.

I agree too, Dickens. The whole TWAW agenda is about male dominance and homophobia. Unfortunately, the very few 'genuine' transpeople who were trying to get on with life as a member of the opposite sex have been caught up in it, and have my absolute sympathy.

I agree.👏👏

BeverleyJB

Oxfam don't support women and children which was the original aim of the organisation. In fact, privileged white women are to be blamed - apparently we support the root cause of sexual violence by wanting bad men imprisoned.

How can an organisation that claims to fight against inequality believe this when women experience sexual violence in far greater numbers than men.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/09/oxfam-training-guide-blames-privileged-white-women-root-causes/

Read the article - then take your donations elsewhere. Oxfam don't deserve your attention.

Oxfam don't support women and children which was the original aim of the organisation. In fact, privileged white women are to be blamed - apparently we support the root cause of sexual violence by wanting bad men imprisoned.

I think what they are attempting to say - or whoever wrote the blurb is trying to say - is that a tearful white woman (who is, by the very nature of being white, 'privileged') garners too much public sympathy which leads the general public to demonise - unjustly - ethnic minority, under-privileged, males. That's how I interpret it. ???

This is my reaction to the observation. Rapists, as defined by section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, have one thing in common - regardless of their background or ethnicity - they are all MEN.

We could fill pages and pages about why men rape women. But I believe it's been established (just about) that it's a power struggle - at its core, men asserting their authority over women. Successful, 'privileged' white men rape women, so do successful and privileged ethnic-minority men. Under-privileged white men and underprivileged ethnic minority men also rape women. And their victims are from all groups, white, black, Asian, rich, poor, privileged, under-privileged. The commonality is that the victims of rape are women and the rapists are men... except of course in those instances where men rape other men, and I don't know enough about that to comment - except possibly it's a particular man exerting his authority over another? I say that because I've never heard a male victim of rape being accused of "asking for it" because of the way he dresses, so I'm assuming it's all part of a power-struggle. There might be those who've studied this 'issue', and I'm willing to learn.

Now I'm going to get myself into hot water. I believe that men who insist that TWAW are conducting this same power-struggle. I'm not accusing them of being rapists, I'm accusing them of wanting to assert their authority over women. They are men indulging in the age-old power struggle. And when they don't get what they want - or their status is debated by the group - women - who are most affected by their stance - they do what men have always done... threaten violence and intimidate, or at least, a minority of them do.

Are OXFAM virtue-signalling in earnest in order to erase their previous record of - for too long - ignoring the claims of abuse of the under-privileged women and girls they were meant to be helping? Is denigrating white privileged women, and blaming them for the cycle of violence perpetrated against them, really going to enhance their image?

I don't know what to make of it TBH Dickens. Like you I'm stunned.

With the other two there was concern around procedures,response,whistleblowing and so on, I am not aware of that with water aid but I am relying on memory and Google!
I still support Jo Coxs charity occassionally for example even though Brendan Cox was pretty much the face of that organisation.

Galaxy

All I know about water aid is that they were involved in the 2018 scandal that has been mentioned. I wasnt donating to them so didnt pay as much attention to their role as I did to those I was supporting. I think the numbers of their staff involved were much lower if that's any comfort.

I've done extensive googling of Water Aid and about them in 2018 and subsequently. There have been no further incidents since then, 5 years ago, except one report of a local subcontractor taking advantage in 2021 who was of course immediately sacked.

I'm open to any other reports but as things stand feel its OK to keep giving if it stopped then and there.

I feel a bit unhappy the "tarring with the same brush" therefore above, but perhaps the original person who drew a parallel with Oxfam knows more that I have found? I do give what is quite bit for me so would genuinely like to know.

Dickens

RosesandLilac

I’m sure I am not the only person who’s read this and been shocked 😳
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/09/oxfam-training-guide-blames-privileged-white-women-root-causes

Thankfully I stopped supporting Oxfam years ago after the Haiti abuse broke. As they probably rely on my generation to volunteer in their shops perhaps this might make some people think again.

'Mainstream feminism centres privileged white women and demands that ''bad men'' be fired or imprisoned.'

Next to the cartoon of a sobbing white woman is a caption saying that this attitude 'legitimises criminal punishment, harming black and other marginalised people'.

'White feminist tears deploy white woundedness, and the sympathy it generates, to hide the harms we perpetuate through white supremacy.'

'I would never tell a survivor of sexual violence what to do, but I would like us to have better choices than criminal punishment, media exposure, or silence.'

Alison Phipps told MailOnline today: 'I can't comment on the Oxfam training materials as I haven't seen them, but my book is grounded in a long tradition of feminist thought and politics that sees criminal punishment as part of the problem and not the solution.

What do GNetters make of this? I'm somewhat stunned by what I've read...

Wokeism

All I know about water aid is that they were involved in the 2018 scandal that has been mentioned. I wasnt donating to them so didnt pay as much attention to their role as I did to those I was supporting. I think the numbers of their staff involved were much lower if that's any comfort.

I pay regularly to Water Aid. I missed the reason why I shouldn't upthread?

The UK Charities Watchdog is considering action against Oxfam over the ad.

www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/07/oxfam-pride-month-cartoon-charities-watchdog?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

BeverleyJB
How can an organisation that claims to fight against inequality believe this when women experience sexual violence in far greater numbers than men.
Because, as we’ve just been told by VS, that OXFAM believe the lie that TWAW which promotes the inequality of males against females.

RosesandLilac

I’m sure I am not the only person who’s read this and been shocked 😳
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/09/oxfam-training-guide-blames-privileged-white-women-root-causes

Thankfully I stopped supporting Oxfam years ago after the Haiti abuse broke. As they probably rely on my generation to volunteer in their shops perhaps this might make some people think again.

'Mainstream feminism centres privileged white women and demands that ''bad men'' be fired or imprisoned.'

Next to the cartoon of a sobbing white woman is a caption saying that this attitude 'legitimises criminal punishment, harming black and other marginalised people'.

'White feminist tears deploy white woundedness, and the sympathy it generates, to hide the harms we perpetuate through white supremacy.'

'I would never tell a survivor of sexual violence what to do, but I would like us to have better choices than criminal punishment, media exposure, or silence.'

Alison Phipps told MailOnline today: 'I can't comment on the Oxfam training materials as I haven't seen them, but my book is grounded in a long tradition of feminist thought and politics that sees criminal punishment as part of the problem and not the solution.

What do GNetters make of this? I'm somewhat stunned by what I've read...

Oxfam don't support women and children which was the original aim of the organisation. In fact, privileged white women are to be blamed - apparently we support the root cause of sexual violence by wanting bad men imprisoned.

How can an organisation that claims to fight against inequality believe this when women experience sexual violence in far greater numbers than men.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/09/oxfam-training-guide-blames-privileged-white-women-root-causes/

Read the article - then take your donations elsewhere. Oxfam don't deserve your attention.

"Fine words butter no parsnips" as the saying goes.

Crikey just going through the list British Gas are a hideous company but thank God they think TWAW whilst breaking in to vulnerable peoples homes.

Cant remember the name of the senior manager involved in harassment but the other one was Brendan Cox.

Well Save the children were, well it was children and women. I think it was about 50 staff involved.

Doodledog

VioletSky

Helpful list of a few other organisations that have signed up as trans inclusive for people to also boycott:

Disney
Microsoft
BP
Sky
Amazon
Bupa
British gas
EDF
Google
NHS
Visa
Save the Children
Which

There's being trans inclusive, and there is being female exclusive, and anyone who bans a game because it is about women falls into the latter category.

I don't care about trans inclusivity - in fact I am in favour of it - but I draw the line at anything that puts trans rights over women's rights, as that is anti-feminist.

Are all these companies abusing vulnerable women?

If so, there needs to be an investigation.

Oh and I stopped my direct debit to save the children when they as an organisation were also involved in abuse. I strangely felt it conflicted with their aims.