Comments on: Womens’ committee UGM motion strongly criticised

By: Anon.

Anon. — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:22:31 +0000

BRING ON LADSOC… YEEEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHH BOIIIIIIII

By: Rinky Stingpiece

Rinky Stingpiece — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:54:04 +0000

What was that phrase again:

“Celebrate Diversity; Challenge Prejudice”

or was it “Discord is unity; ignorance is strength”, I forget.

I’ll never understand why we let them out of the kitchen/bedroom (depending on how fat they are).

(go on, take the bait!)

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:06:48 +0000

Philip- I voted for and supported the idea of the women’s committee being open to all so for me that is not an issue. The point I was trying to make is that some people can feel like they are a woman in a man’s body or vice versa. It is not a trivial point gender and biological sex are different things. In my opionion no one has to judge the claim you can define as whatever you like that is the idea of a free society. Therefore you can not limit a committee to only one gender. What I took issue with was Dan’s suggestion that 98% of the population view this idea as wrong. I am interested where he got that figure from as I don’t think it’s the case.

By: Philip Walker

Philip Walker — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:11:15 +0000

Ben, Dan’s question is a good one. If someone self-defines as female, then on what basis can anyone else judge the claim? Any standard will implicitly suggest that the judge, not the individual, have the right to decide what being female means. That’s an abuse of the individual’s right to self-determine, yeah?

On the one hand, if people who “self-define” as female must be let in, then there is no standard. But Burge’s statement, that “Women’s Committee must be women-only” assumes the existence of an objective status of womanhood. So which is it to be? Both cannot be true!

By: Sam Bayley

Sam Bayley — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 10:20:07 +0000

Bronach, just to clarify, Women’s Officers are voted on by a cross-campus ballot (men and women) - this is because they are a trustee. The rest of Women’s Committee voting is women only.

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:40:35 +0000

Dan- As Sarah said sex and gender are different. However you can’t just change it as you like to just attend a meeting. Its about what people feel and psychological factors. I am interested where you get the idea that 98% of people agree with your ideas. You would be suprised about how open minded most people in the world are not just in university. I live in the “real world” and I don’t share your views.

By: Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:58:35 +0000

Sarah Foster:

The concept of this motion would not only allow gender-self-defining ‘females’ to attend (as it does already) but instead men who do not somehow (God only knows how) not decide to ’self-define’ as female. If this is not the case, then proposing this motion is futile because anyone who comes and says ‘I am female’ can attend committee. It all seems ludicrous to me. I still do not understand HOW a male can gender-define as ‘FEMALE’. How do they prove this? Or can anyone just say it? Must they wear a dress? Seriously guys, this is not biggotry- I genuinly do not understand how the hell this works. Then again, perhaps guys attending women’s committee may help broaden this understanding…

By: Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:39:07 +0000

At least I’m living in the real world and not one of warped, ridiculous ideas that 98% of the population view as being ‘wrong’. It’s a shame you resort to name-calling rather than challenging my argument as the post above you did.

By: Erik O'Connor

Erik O'Connor — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:55:24 +0000

Can’t see how Dan’s comment is relevant at all. This is about making a discriminatory institution disappear. It’s really that simple, and putting my face on a poster doesn’t change my mind.

By: Grace Fletcher-Hackwood

Grace Fletcher-Hackwood — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:41:46 +0000

Just to point out that I am certainly not ‘taking a stand against a fellow officer’ - I am campaigning against a UGM motion. If you can call sticking a poster in your window ‘campaigning’…it’s not really up to my usual efforts…

By: Trans Rights

Trans Rights — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:40:26 +0000

Dan, you are a nasty, bigoted, small-minded, horrible, horrible man.

By: Sarah Foster

Sarah Foster — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:56:09 +0000

It is generally established Dan, that gender and sex are different things. Sex is biological, and yes, does refer to chromosomes, but gender is certainly not connected to biology in any way. While close minded people like you might disagree, there is no way that you can claim that someone who was born male, but has been living as a female (either with or without genial realignment surgery) could be referred to as male. To argue anything else is vaguely offensive and if anything, shows a complete lack of knowledge concerning the psychological ideas contained in the word ‘gender’.

By: Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:14:00 +0000

Sorry; what sex you are is not ’self-defined’ and if you think it is you are talking utter bollocks quite frankly. Sex is genetically determined- if you happen to not like the sex you are, then tough titty. Live with it. All this about ’self-definition’ with regard to something genetically unchangeable is ridiculous and makes anyone who thinks it, the laughing stock of all. Even if someone has a sex change, it 1) does not alter their genetic makeup, and 2) does not alter the makeup of chromosones that make us ‘male’ or ‘female’. It’s politically-correct clap-trap to suggest anything else.

By: Bronach

Bronach — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:42:55 +0000

The motion is also criticised from quite a few sources from outside the university. The noted women’s campaigner, Julie Bindel, has joined the group against the motion.

Perhaps York just isn’t leading the way in the women’s campaign, hence a certain amount of students being in favour, rather than against the motion for men on Women’s Committee.

Although I understand that all students can vote on Union and constitutional issues, why are male students getting to vote on the very future of Women’s Committee, when only female students can vote the Women’s Officer in?

By: Katie

Katie — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:25:25 +0000

What happens if a student defines as neither female nor male? Don’t they deserve union representation equally as much as anyone else?

By: Joseph Burnham

Joseph Burnham — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:22:50 +0000

I’d suggest that the motion isn’t highly criticised, merely highly controversial. The amount of support and membership on the pro-motion group illustrates that there is a huge amount of support for it from a great variety of people, whereas the against group seems to be made up of a rather vocal minority of people who are already active in the committee.