@quaker.org.uk is there a place still in Quakers for those of us who consider Supreme Court ruling in ForWomen Scotland case to be legally & morally correct? I have experienced years of harassment for this. Please advise as seriously considering whether to give up my membership - ThreadSky

audreysuffolk.bsky.social • 8 days ago

@quaker.org.uk is there a place still in Quakers for those of us who consider Supreme Court ruling in ForWomen Scotland case to be legally & morally correct? I have experienced years of harassment for this. Please advise as seriously considering whether to give up my membership

Comments

faithfuldefenceadv.bsky.social•8 days ago

I’m sure there are other churches you would be welcome in Audrey

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•8 days ago

I am sure but at one point I felt Quakers my spiritual home but the intolerance of difference and authoritarianism by some Quakers has genuinely shocked me

susanshox.bsky.social•8 days ago

I'm very sorry to hear that, Audrey. So many institutions have failed so very dismally to live up to their own publicity.

generalludd.bsky.social•8 days ago

You will need to elaborate.

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•8 days ago

I have felt unwelcome in British Quakers for believing that legally and morally sex is binary, innate and matters sometimes in law and policy . In my professional work and life that has led to being seriously harassed. Now Equality Act clarified I want to know that I am welcome to be politely open

generalludd.bsky.social•7 days ago

We are called to center ourselves on total devotion to the holiness within, among and around us with all our hearts, minds, soul and might. And to love our neighbors as ourselves. This is a messy and uncomfortable but cheerful path.

fathomdeep.bsky.social•7 days ago

What does that mean, in this specific context? Are you saying Audrey should put her views to one side and 'be nice'?

generalludd.bsky.social•7 days ago

No. She should take her concerns to the committee on ministry and counsel. Nobody should be cast out for their views. Love should always be the first motion for everyone involved. And all should strive to speak from deep honesty. A claim of moral justification cannot be left unquestioned.

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•7 days ago

And where and when is the manifestation for love ever for people like me?

generalludd.bsky.social•7 days ago

I would be rejecting my claim to be Quaker to not engage with you from a place of love, even though I don’t know you and I will likely never meet you. But I would be remiss if I didn’t ask you to reflect deeply on the source of your moral claim. Does it come from the Inner Teacher?

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•6 days ago

Interesting because she didn’t ask if all Quaker’s agree with her, only if she would be welcome even if she’s honest about her position. You seem to feel that shes wrong and you are right, though you haven’t even stated a
position. Have you reflected deeply?

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•7 days ago

Absolutely, my professional and moral life is all about the universality and balancing of equality rights based on parity of esteem (whilst recognising that in specific contexts to prevent indirect discrimination you may need to treat certain groups differently). The SC judgment provides that.

gerbelean.bsky.social•7 days ago

People can believe that sex is binary and innate, but when scrutinised scientifically, sex is neither binary or innate. Societies throughout history have recognised this. I believe ours would be all the richer if we stopped trying to silo people into constructed gender conformity.

susanshox.bsky.social•7 days ago

The "scientists" who claim sex is not binary or innate are 1) not doing science and 2) not describing sex.
Societies thru history have made space for men who wouldn't conform to male sex roles, but it's best explained as shoring up rigid stereotypes and almost always benefits men, not women.

generalludd.bsky.social•6 days ago

Define what makes a person female or male.

susanshox.bsky.social•6 days ago

Whether their reproductive anatomy is organised around the production of large gametes (female) or small ones (male). This in no way excludes individuals who do not actually produce gametes bc of age, illness or disorder of development.

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•7 days ago

Gender conformity and the recognition of biological sex are completely unrelated. I am a very gender nonconforming woman. The loudest voices against gender ideology are indeed and quite sadly just bigots. It’s so sad that so few can see past their idiocy

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•7 days ago

(To the point where I often wonder if this strain of “trans women are women” was invented by conservatives to make leftists look like total idiots to anyone sitting on the fence. They know a lot of progressives will jump into things without fully thinking them through to be kind, which is lovely.

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•7 days ago

But in this case there are some people with at least one foot in reality and who care about women, who simply can’t go along with it. We certainly could figure out how to respect and protect both trans women and women, but it seems like almost no one wants to

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•7 days ago

Richard Dawkins and most other reputable biologists say otherwise

gerbelean.bsky.social•7 days ago

If I'm reading your statement correctly, then what you're saying is that any biologist who doesn't agree with you is dishonest, fraudulent, or misleading. The Quakers weren't wrong when they made you feel unwelcome.

susanshox.bsky.social•7 days ago

That is an appalling thing to say. Shame on you if you delude yourself that you're more morally worthy than Audrey. You're not.

alanf.bsky.social•7 days ago

That you can draw that interpretation from what she has said is simply not credible.
The sentiments you express are really unpleasant and uncalled for.

marjanefan.bsky.social•7 days ago

you sound pleasant . The hatred and harassment comes completely from your side. And as a woman with a female specific DSD you talking nonsense

audreysuffolk.bsky.social•7 days ago

Please do not misrepresent my words. I am saying that your view is not (as yet) even scientific consensus; and yet you claim it is. I disagree. Neither of us is a scientist

painttherosesred.bsky.social•6 days ago

Id suggest giving it time for the ideological virtue signaling to give way to history as the decision fails to cause even a de minimis harm to anyone and embarrassed liberal xtians learn that Matthew 6:5 is often good advice even for those who feel the strongest convictions.

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•8 days ago

It’s very strange as Quakers supposedly value honesty particularly highly, don’t they?. I’m sorry you’re struggling with this

mambarlife.bsky.social•7 days ago

Please don’t. You stand as a beacon for all the values I admire in Quakers.

mambarlife.bsky.social•7 days ago

And if you leave, who is left in your stead ?

marjanefan.bsky.social•8 days ago

You can ask @rcquaker.bsky.social directly here. He has shown a shocking level of bias

nondairycanary.bsky.social•8 days ago

I'd have expected better from the Quakers. Mind you, I'd have expected better from the Green Party. And don't even get me started on the NHS.

redesau.bsky.social•8 days ago

"How do we address violence and conflict around us?...
Yearly Meeting 2025 will be rooted in Quaker peace testimony"
I hope some time will be devoted to addressing the conflicts within the RSoF rather than just ignoring them and hoping they will go away.
Sadly seasoned Friends are leaving.

drumpas.bsky.social•8 days ago

I hope so. Many Friends would welcome continuing discernment on this, in the full spirit of Minute 31, to reach a place of reconciliation and respect for all rights.

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•8 days ago

What is minute 31?

drumpas.bsky.social•8 days ago

Minute 31: Acknowledging and Welcoming Gender Diverse People, and the need for us all to listen and search together. You’ll find the whole minute here.

https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/yearly-meeting-minutes-substantive

gaillardiafever.bsky.social•6 days ago

Thank you! That’s lovely but also pretty vague. The minute itself in no way conflicts with acknowledging that women exist

drumpas.bsky.social•5 days ago

Agreed. And it encourages continuing to search together.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply