expulsion as a means of de-platforming women in the green party

In support of women’s sex based rights, a motion co-proposed by 87 members was ruled ‘out of order’ by the Party’s Standing Orders Committee (SOC). Short of a successful challenge to that decision at the Report stage of conference business, motion A79 entitled “Establishing Women’s Rights Section in PSS Following Supreme Court Judgment” will not be debated at this 2025 Autumn conference in Bournemouth.

What A79 seeks to establish is a new “Women’s Rights” section in the Rights and Responsibilities chapter of the Policy for a Sustainable Society (PSS) affirming single-sex provisions under the Equality Act 2010 as necessary for women’s safety, dignity, privacy and
equality, following the Supreme Court judgment in FWS v Scottish Ministers
(16 April 2025).

Judging by the sexist and deeply mysogynist contents of much of the comments posted on the pre-conference Forum in the weeks leading to the publication of the Final Agenda, such bureaucratic means of de-platforming women’s voices was, sadly, all too predictable.

Here are some examples of the tone of those comments :

” Chris( tyn) Parkes: “This is a despicable motion to put forward. It advocates the de facto segregation of trans people and regime of incessant infringmeent of their rights to privacy and a dignified life under the Human Rights Act. It is repleted with bigoted, trans phobic ‘gender critical ‘ / dogwhistles.…It is another example of the crybulling victimhood complex of so many advocates of transphopbia..The people who proposed it should be ashamed of themselves and have no business being in this party “.

James Nelson : “This is blatantly an attempt to take us down the terf approach …in any event, we don’t need to agree with the supreme court judgement and I doubt the majority of the membership would agree with that decision “.

Emma Wolfe : ” Promoting segregation of a minoritry is inherently violent and should have no place in our party. Hell, I’d argue it should be considerered a code of conduct breach in itself “

Andrea Grainger: “I would suggest bringing in SOC to rule the motion out of order “

And adding a predictable twist to those comments from identinarian zealot and former Green Party Women’s co-chair with reference to the misery and violence of the Jim Crow laws – thus coat tailing on racist segregation laws based on skin colour:

Kathryn Bristow : ” Racial segregation was put in place on the premise that black women were inherently and biologically more violent, so they would pose a danger to white women. I don’t know how someone wouldn’t see the same rationale is being used to exclude trans people from bathrooms today “.

Not content with securing an ‘out of order’ ruling from their trans extremists friends serving on the Standing Orders Commitee – notably Melanie Earp and Ash Routh – we understand that a formal complaint against the proposer to the motion with a request for expulsion has also been lodged.

On what grounds this request for expulsion been made is not known as complaints are confidential. However, given the nature of comments reported above, the pretext is likely to be an allegation of a breach of the Code of Conduct as contained in transactual’s inspired “Guide to a definition of Queerphobia”.

Should such complaint be upheld by the Discipinary Committee and the proposer to motion A79 be expelled prior to the start of conference, any challenge to SOC’s ruling could be mounted by one – or a number – of the 87 supporters to the motion. But that is unlikely to happen.

The point is that Green Party Women’s campaign for women’s sex-based rights has been de-platformed and a further committed member of that official group is facing expulsion.