And then the other place I'd point people towards is Fat Studies journal. They are using the adjective 'fat' in a reclaimed way - I use 'larger' above as it's less likely to be misunderstood if the posts are seen individually.

The material culture and lives of larger people are underdiscussed in archaeology. However, there is a good talk by Ginette Rough on Youtube that would probably interest @tag2025york.bsky.social attendees.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tDD_TEBBpA&t=4s&pp=ygUOZ2luZXR0ZSByb3VnaCA%3D

For more on the social impacts of such choices, see Brewis, A. et al. (2016), Publically misfitting: Extreme weight and the everyday production and reinforcement of felt stigman. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 31(2), 257-276. Available free here: anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...

Congratulations! Lovely photo :)

That was my reading anyway!

(3/3) you are allowed to call yourself a "women's and trans women's group" and admit all women.

(2/2) (e.g. limiting a space to women who are either gay or disabled). So, it doesn't actively say you can do that, but I can't see anything prohibiting it.

However, it *does* say that you cannot both a) call yourself a women's group and b) admit trans women.

It is unclear whether... (oops 2/3)

No, I do think it's enforcing transphobia.

I think it says you can limit a space to 1 characteristic (e.g. just women) or a combination of two characteristics (e.g. just gay women). It doesn't say anything about three characteristics (e.g. black gay women) or a combination of two groups(1/2)

The phrasing is a bit Bilbo Baggins' birthday speech though

My understanding is that is says that you *can* limit it to a combination of 2 characteristics, not that you *have* to limit it to 2 characteristics?