No men; open to all genders
[NC is Naomi Cunningham, KT is Katie Horsburgh, 23-year-old board member of ERCC]
NC: Discussion here of having NB ppl in women-only organisation.
KT: There are no men at ERCC. Open to all genders
NC: Am talking about staff
KT: I think website says we create women-only place.
NC: Says no men
KT: Correct
Still playing stupid games. “There are no men at ERCC; ERCC is open to all genders.”
NC: You are aware some ppl think being man or woman is matter of biology. Can’t change. Some ppl think yes
KT: Yes they do
NC: So you are being unclear when you say “no men”.
KT: Disagree. T-I policy is on website. And we have a meeting to match ppl to support worker.
Stupid stupid stupid games.
NC: Are you saying that saying “no men” plus publishing TI policy, that means all SUs will be clear that there might be TW employed?
KT: We don’t employ any men –
NC: Not asking that. Asking if clear to all SUs
KT: In combination – policies, initial meeting – yes, clear.
In other words we play stupid games but we say so on the website and in the initial meeting so that’s fine then.
NC: Can you imagine an SU [service user] may be without your educational privileges, who might *not* understand that?
KT: We have diverse highly trained team, match the service standards, to put with right support worker
“Do you realize some people might not understand your stupid games?” “Oh we have a highly trained team to explain our stupid games to the peasantry.”
The smug malice of all this just makes my skin crawl.
The entire cult’s smug superiority is, I think, the thing that gets me the most. It’s one thing to be smug, but the condescending way their gnostic faith manifests triggers an unbridled rage.
I’ve had less infuriating conversations with Trump voters.
I know; same.
Even true believers can’t make their stupid ideology cohere.
Same here too.
wut
Aren’t they the ones who claim ‘men’ is one of the gender (as opposed to sex) words?
I’d like to note a Helen Joyce anecdote. She said the number one most common question she would be asked once someone became aware that she writes on sex and gender is a whispered “now, is a trans woman a man who thinks he’s a woman, or a woman who thinks she’s a man?” And I expect that Joyce mainly encounters a better educated crowd than most.
Holms, The no men at ERCC might be true – if seen through the trans activist lens and applied only to staff. ERCC state on their website that they are open to victims who are women, men, girls and boys. I would hope that there is the option in group therapy to have at least people who identify as men attend different sessions from people who identify as women. Who know’s, the whole argument is so farcical.
Incidentally, Katie Horsburgh has quite an online life. I was curious what qualified a 23 year old to be a board member for such a serious and critical organisation. I would have expected the Board to be composed of people with life experience and a mix of skills. KH first appears talking about the need to reduce sexual harassment of girls at age 15. She’s involved in the Scottish Girl Guides and since leaving school her interest and involvement in intersectional feminism seems to have continued at both University (Sociology with a focus on gender) and through some kind of internship with a member of the Scottish Government. She’s been given awards by the Gender.Ed department/group at Edinburgh Uni for her activism. She comes across as an intensely passionate and idealistic young woman who wants to do the absolute best by groups she sees as disadvantaged – girls/women, POC, poor, and obviously trans people. In the ERCC governance return she lists her occupation as Democracy Assistant, whatever that is. At some point post 15, she’s obviously come under the influence or mentorship of people who have widened her definition of women.
As an aside, I couldn’t find ERCC’s governance documents online, but I note that their entire Board of seven have rolled over since 2021. That seems an abnormally high degree of churn to me, but I’m not on any charity sector boards so have no point of comparison.