Fully fully fully inclusive

The campaign to take away everything that belongs to women is flourishing.

A Cheshire Women’s Institute branch has announced it will close at the end of March after members voted overwhelmingly to suspend the group in protest at the national organisation’s exclusion of trans women.

Members of Social Lites WI gathered for a “Special Meeting” on 4 March attended by representatives of the Cheshire Federation of WIs, to formally officiate a vote on the group’s future. More than 75% of members who attended in person or voted by email backed suspension, paving the way for the branch’s closure after 13 years of fully inclusive operation.

How are we defining “fully inclusive”? You’d think inclusive of women would be all that’s required, but no, apparently a WI is fully inclusive only if it has some men.

The committee said many members “could no longer be part of an organisation that supports this exclusion”, describing the decision as one made in solidarity with a marginalised minority.

To wit, men. They think men are a marginalised minority while, I guess, women are the privileged ruthless majority. Seems odd.

The committee acknowledged the emotional weight of the decision but said the values of welcome, equality and solidarity had always been central to the group’s identity. Closing, they said, was the only way to remain true to those principles.

But surely being women was also central to the group’s identity. It is the Women’s Institute after all. Surely the values of welcome, equality and solidarity toward and with women were good enough, weren’t they? It’s not as if men lack institutions.