*Someone’s* getting direct support from American billionaires, and it isn’t grassroots feminist organizers.
Does the gender identity movement spend all their time talking about their opponents’ funding because they don’t want anyone else to take a look at theirs? Seems likely...
Not, mind you, that we’d object if a large donor were allied with our principles, unlikely as that is.
It’s a worrying hindrance how many people think political work should be like joining a monastic order where you have to take a vow of poverty to have any credibility.
We’re fighting, collectively, millions of dollars worth of advertising, legal work, public relations, and professional lobbying. But every time any radical feminist, individually or as a group, raises money to fight in these arenas, it’s called into question as if it were sinful.
Very wealthy people and organizations are spending a lot of money, and employing a lot of people, to destroy women’s rights.
The repeated horror at the idea that women might try to mount a commensurate response is a self-defeating adoption of our opponents’ concern trolling.
Someone really had ought to be spending millions to defend women’s rights.
Women deserve it. We make all the people, and this work does not pay well, or usually at all. We could use the help.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
New polling shows that support for "gender identity" policies in California has dropped nearly 20 points since 2020! On questions related to prisons, changing rooms, and shelters, voters now overwhelmingly support single-sex spaces. 🎉
Strong support for placing male offenders in women’s prisons was cut nearly in half in the past three years, with a 17% increase in strong disagreement with such policies. #KeepPrisonsSingleSex
The largest swing over the past three years was on the topic of homeless and domestic violence shelters, with 51.6% of CA voters in strong support of single-sex shelters, up from 32.8% in 2020. Strong support for letting men into women’s shelters dropped drastically.
A whistleblower shared with Sasha Stone at @AwardsDaily that the controversial decision won a 26 to 27 vote in favor of removing award categories for women. The next voting meeting to finalize the decision will be held on December 11, 2022.
Victory! Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules: Men Are Not "Natural Born Females"
In 2021, WoLF submitted an amicus brief in the case of Green v. Miss USA—Today, the Ninth Circuit affirmed that the #FirstAmendment protects against being forced to say that men can be women
1/6
From today's ruling:
"The district court held that the First Amendment protected the Pageant’s expressive association rights to exclude a person who would impact the group’s ability to express its views—"
2/6
"...The panel agreed that summary judgment for the Pageant was correct, but reached this conclusion not under the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of association but rather under the First Amendment’s protection against compelled speech."
3/6
Since 1972, Congress has interpreted "sex" under #TitleIX as allowing differential treatment based on sex in some settings, including single-sex athletics, toilets, locker rooms, & showers. These exist to ensure women have safe, equal access to educ. opportunities. #SexNotGender
This week, ACLU filed a Motion to Intervene in WoLF’s California lawsuit challenging SB 132, which allows men who self-identify as women into women-only prisons: womensliberationfront.org/news/aclu-move… 1/6
Lambda Legal, the Transgender Law Center, and the ACLU foundations of Northern California and Southern California are representing four incarcerated men along with the Transgender Gender-Variant & Intersex Justice Project (“TGIJP”). 2/6
The ACLU objects to the state’s choice to slow the transfer the more than 300 men who have sought transfer to women’s facilities, one-third of whom are sex offenders (though the ACLU denies this documented, material fact in its court pleadings). 3/6
2/9 Dr. Devin Buckley, a feminist philosopher and WoLF board member, was scheduled to speak at Harvard University on her cutting-edge work on British Romanticism and philosophy.
3/9 But on April 18th, Dr. Buckley was notified that she had been disinvited, citing her board membership with "an organization that takes a public stance regarding trans people as dangerous and deceptive."