Oxfam is a world-wide development organisation that mobilises the power of people against poverty. Well, that’s what they say they’re supposed to do. But they have entered the new religion of wokeness by pushing an extreme sexuality and gender ideology video, and have quickly alienated many of their supporters. But it’s not the first time…
Oxfam is a world-wide development organization that mobilizes the power of people against poverty. Well, that’s what they say they’re supposed to do. But they have entered the new religion of wokeness and are quickly alienating many of their supporters.
According to media reports, Oxfam has removed a Pride cartoon on social media after facing a backlash for including an offensive term. The international charity wrote that “a more equal future is possible” when “all gender identities and expressions have agency over their lives” in a tweet last Thursday.
You’ll note this image – The cartoon character in the original appeared to resemble Ms Rowling’s usual haircut and style, as well as a green dress she has been pictured wearing. A memorial poppy she wore in the real image – taken at a 2018 film premiere – is replaced with a badge, bearing the word ‘Terf’ – short for trans-exclusionary radical feminist – you know, a feminist who believes that only biological women can be women. But OXFAM are doing it in a derogatory way. And on the right there is what’s believed to be Florida governor and presidential candidate Ron De Santis.
Family Education Trust in the UK tweeted ”Here’s another still from Oxfam’s Pride month video. Clearly they support puberty blockers, lifelong medication and unnecessary surgery for healthy children. Drag queens are in there too”
Peter Linas from the Evangelical Alliance in the UK tweeted this
Oxfam are rightly getting huge pushback for this. The ratio of replies and quote tweets to likes is a good sign – people don’t agree. Look at the demonisation and ageism against the women – labelled a terf. Shocking from @Oxfam
Oxfam has now edited the video to remove the term “TERF” and apologised for the offence caused. Oxfam insisted it was not supposed to be based on anyone – YEAH RIGHT – and said it would re-release a cut version of the cartoon. Even if it wasn’t intended to be JK Rowling – which I don’t think anyone would believe them on – they still used the derogatory TERF label. Their intention is clear. An Oxfam International spokesperson said:
“Oxfam believes that all people should be able to make decisions which affect their lives, enjoy their rights and live a life free of discrimination and violence, including people from LGBTQIA+ communities. In efforts to make an important point about the real harm caused by transphobia, we made a mistake. We have therefore edited the video to remove the term TERF and we are sorry for the offence it caused. There was no intention by Oxfam or the film-makers for this slide to have portrayed any particular person or people. We fully support both an individual’s rights to hold their philosophical beliefs and a person’s right to have their identity respected, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics.”
But this tweet correctly says “In this opening scene of its ‘updated’ video, Oxfam is saying we ‘protect trans kids’ by supporting top surgery. Utterly despicable.”
Maya Forstater who is co-founder and Executive Director of Sex Matters and is campaigning for clarity on sex in law and policy in the UK tweeted “Demonising safeguarding, demonising older women, promoting double-mastectomies to children, bulk harassment of gender -critical staff.”
Interestingly this article recently was also published – perhaps because of the furore over the video. The charity was accused of hounding out a volunteer for defending the writer. A former worker – calling herself Maria – said she was accused of transphobia before settling with the charity, which apologised for its handling of the process.
Three years after joining the charity, she was promoted to a co-ordinating role within the women’s rights team, whose remit was to ensure that female equality was reflected in Oxfam’s work. She realised almost immediately how impossible that aim would be, given the growing dominance of a pro-trans mindset within Oxfam. Along with many other charities and institutions, it had capitulated to gender-based ideals, ones that asserts that “trans women are women” and that the categories of male and female are on a spectrum, rather than biological realities. On the advice of Stonewall — the discredited charity whose workplace diversity scheme sought to “recognise and celebrate the efforts of leading employers to advance LGBT inclusion” — Oxfam advised its employees to state their pronouns in meetings and on correspondence. “It was regularly using Stonewall materials to advise staff on LGBTQ+ inclusion in the workplace, with a heavy emphasis on transgender ideology above all else.”
While I was researching this, I came across this story from
Oxfam has been slammed for a “bizarre” new “inclusive” language guide issued to staff that warns against using a whole slew of normal words like “stand”, “pregnant mother” and “people” – and even apologises for being written in English. The charity guide says that words like “headquarters”, “local” and even “people” have colonial implications and should be avoided. Staff were warned that “people who become pregnant” was preferable to “expectant mothers”, while “parent” is better than “mother” or “father”. Words related to age like “youth” and “the elderly” were also better off avoided, to allow people to remain dignified, the guide added.
Here’s another example
People who menstruate, women, girls, trans men and non-binary people who menstruate
Many of the negative social ideas around menstruation have a misogynist basis, menstruation is also experiences by people who deo not identity as a woman or a girl
People who become pregnant – using the term ‘expectant mothers’ rather than ‘pregnant women’ reinforces gender stereotypes and assumes that the woman in question wants to continue the pregnancy and will carry the pregnancy to term.
Oh – so they’re also keen on abortion as well. It just gets worse.
Breastfeeding people, people who breastfeed
Not all people who breastfeed identify as women, e.g. non-binary parents
And have you heard of AFAB and AMAB? You have now
According to OXFAM, it’s “assigned female at birth” “assigned male at birth”
We avoid biological male / female, we avoid born male / female
The start of the book contains an apology to readers for being written in and about the English language, the Mail reported. “We recognise that this guide has its origin in English, the language of a colonising nation,” the introduction says. “We acknowledge the Anglo-supremacy of the sector as part of its coloniality. The guide says headquarters… implies a colonial power dynamic”, “aid sector… cements ideology where an agent with resources gives support on a charitable basis and “field trip” can “reinforce colonial attitudes”.
The charity came in for stinging criticism for the guide, with some observers telling Oxfam to focus on their core mission of alleviating poverty.
Now I did check the NZ chapter of Oxfam just to see if this ideology had seeped onto their webpahe. No evidence of it – yet. But we will monitor it.
I will never tell you who to give your money to.
But I’ll certainly tell you about the ideology of organisations which may be harmful – just as we did recently with Amnesty International, so that you can give with both eyes open.