What follows is an open letter and enquiry under the UK Freedom of Information Act to the Camden Centre Events Manager, on behalf of MRA London, concerning Radfem 2013 which is to be held at the Camden Centre in London.

The only contact information we currently have for the Camden Centre is this:

Contact the Camden Centre

We have been unable to reach them using the phone (no answer).

We will publish updates to this when we have them. Stay tuned.

* * *

[box]

May 29th, 2013.

Dear Camden Centre Events Manager,

THIS IS AN OPEN LETTER AND ENQUIRY UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000

On the 8th and 9th of June, 2013, the Camden Centre will be hosting the annual conference of Radfem, a pro-violence group whose members have a documented history of advocating harm to male infants, gendercide of half the human race, not to mention, hate toward transgender women.

The event is restricted to female attendees only.

I am writing to you on behalf of MRA London, therefore, to enquire under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the following information from you:

1. On what grounds did the Camden Centre conclude that this event, which specifically excludes people on the grounds of sex, does not breach the UK Equality Act 2010?

2. How was this decision reached, and who made it?

3. Why did the Camden Centre not require the organisers to observe the Equality Act?

With regard to the exclusionary nature of the event, the official Radfem event website states the following:

“We welcome radical feminists and those women who want to learn more about radical feminism. It is women-only because we believe that we need to organise autonomously in order to fight for our freedom from patriarchy.” [1]

Last year, the Conway Hall convention centre rejected Radfem’s 2012 booking citing the UK equality law. The London Irish Centre, the original planned venue for 2013, also rejected Radfem’s booking earlier this year. While it can be argued that certain services and events may be applicable only to one sex, the official Radfem 2013 website also states:

“We are revolutionaries, fighting for social change, and overthrowing current patriarchal systems. … Radical feminism goes to the heart of female oppression by naming male domination and violence as being responsible for women’s subordination. … Gender only exists for the benefit of men, as a class, at the expense of women, as a class.” [2]

I do not consider myself an “oppressor” and regard the implication that I am responsible for violence, domination and subordination because I was born male as egregiously offensive and a denial of my humanity. Certainly, I have never benefited at the expense of women, either as a class or individually. I, therefore, do not accept that Radfem is a legitimate female-only event because the ideology espoused by its members affects me directly and personally, along with all males, not to mention every mother of a son. These are questions for everybody, not just one sex.

I have previously attended pro-female events, such as the Women of the World Festival in 2013, which did not seek to exclude males. In fact, I found certain aspects of the experience extremely rewarding and established positive contacts with groups representing female interests. MRA London has an inclusive membership, also, and we not discriminate based on sex or gender. I put it to you, therefore, that there is no legitimate reason why Radfem should be allowed to do so. Furthermore, as a public entity that is meant to serve all members of the community, the Camden Centre should not be facilitating any agenda of ideological exclusion.

Finally, I would like to draw your attention to the “No Delegation” clause of the Public Sector Equality Duty [3], in connection with third question of my enquiry under the Freedom of Information Act. The Camden Centre, as a facility provided by Camden Council, had a duty to ensure that the event organisers complied with the law. You could have, for example, required Radfem to open the attendance criteria to all human beings. Why was the Public Sector Equality Duty not observed in this case?

I look forward to receiving your reply.

Yours faithfully

Andy Thomas

MRA LONDON

[/box]

References

1. http://radfem2013.moonfruit.com/#/about/

2. http://radfem2013.moonfruit.com/#/about/

3. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85019/equality-duty.pdf