City of London's sneaky 'Consultation' to end its Single Sex Spaces in Sunday Times

No defence, but 'no real trans' has already appeared.

You utter donkeys @cityoflondon Your survey has completely cocked up sex & gender. If EVEN I can see this, YOU are royally screwed. (a cat with no legs is not a slug. Just as a man with no penis is not a woman). Thank you.*

Says...Katie Hopkins on Twitter. Could this day get any more surreal?

OK, thanks, Olennas, didn't know that.

Popchyk, I saw that too. Not much of a consultation, then! I've responded and hesitated over the very first question as there were no options I wanted to pick. I settled in the end of finding something to click and making full use of the comments box on every question. Probably a waste of time, but I felt I had to try. Hampstead Heath is one of my favourite places in the world. I've never swum in the ponds but I do use the loos there, and at the Guildhall Art Gallery, which is great (and free) and the free public loos in the City. So I felt I had a genuine personal stake in the issue.

We are asking that respondents affirm that they do accept that trans people exist and that they should be entitled to be recognised in their gender.

No-one denies that trans people exist; most people accept that in most situations recognition of preferred gender is appropriate.

This has nothing to do with sex segregated spaces however

We are asking that respondents affirm that they do accept that trans people exist

How exactly are they going to phrase that question? Nobody denies that trans people exist. We just have issues with allowing men into women's spaces.

Idiots.

Gasp - EL has been openly bisexual since at least 2012

"We are asking that respondents affirm that they do accept that trans people exist and that they should be entitled to be recognised in their gender. Anyone who is unable to give that affirmation is unlikely to respond fairly to the other questions in the consultation".

Ah. Sounds to me like any respondents who "fail" the first question will be screened out. Their further comments will not be taken into consideration.

And Edward Lord is admitting that from the get-go.

Very good comment here under The Sunday Times piece:

Even if internal gender were a real thing, why would you use it to segregate? It's your body that goes to the loo, not your gender or feelings. Females and males deserve privacy and dignity, some areas are sex segregated for very good reasons. Why alter sex segregation and replace it with who identifies as their sexist stereotype?

Actually, lots of excellent comments, but that one stood out for me.

Most illuminating link there, Olennas. I note that EL was at one time, don't know whether he still is, living with a LibDem activist (female). If that is still the case, I wonder how she feels about his recent declaration that he's non-binary?

Can someone who's on twitter re-tweet that little exchange to Andrew Gilligan?

In case you think the consultations not meant to be rigged:

Edwardlord To be clear, thanks to the Equality Act 2010 #trans people are already welcome to use the @cityoflondon loos that most suit their gender. It is a shame that @mragilligan and @thesundaytimes have chosen to publish such a misleading article about our #GenderIdentity consultation. t.co/T2HiVENZpi

CherylMorgan Then why are you running a consultation that invites the public to deny that trans people exist?

Edwardlord We aren't. We are asking that respondents affirm that they do accept that trans people exist and that they should be entitled to be recognised in their gender. Anyone who is unable to give that affirmation is unlikely to respond fairly to the other questions in the consultation.

Well well well
twitter.com/edwardlord/status/1023506373445910528?s=19

Andrew Gilligan tweets about Pink News cock-up.

twitter.com/mragilligan/status/1023608355028430848?s=21

I thought we were a portal - "hub" feels like a downgrade to me

Has that person come up with a defence for Jess Bradley yet?

Focus seems elsewhere!

No, obviously it's all about the nasty journalists using nasty words....

Although LM did describe MN as "a hub for anti-trans hate speech" two days ago

I thought we were a portal - "hub" feels like a downgrade to me

Our favourite women's officer has got Andrew Gilligan on their "blocked" list grin

Because nothing says political engagement like blocking a top investigative journalist hmm

I would love to know whether said women's officer is labouring under the misapprehension that blocking someone then means that that someone can no longer see your tweets... I can, sadly, actually imagine the women's officer in question being that dim.

Has that person come up with a defence for Jess Bradley yet?

Our favourite women's officer has got Andrew Gilligan on their "blocked" list

Because nothing says political engagement like blocking a top investigative journalist

Pink News:
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/07/29/the-sunday-times-comes-under-fire-for-scaremongering-and-anti-trans-article-on-womens-toilets/

Andrew Gilligan & Benjamin Cohen
twitter.com/mragilligan/status/1023586297989025794

Andrew Gilligan criticised by many prominant TRAs in response to the article:

twitter.com/edwardlord/status/1023506373445910528

twitter.com/mragilligan/status/1023576995320483840

Can any subscribers add a comment about gender critical posters being blocked by Lord and having limited access to information about the consultation.

Another example of trying to push policies through using subversion.

Some suitable photos here to illustrate the bonkersness of EL proclaiming to be NB whilst wallowing in male privilege

Yes. It says it all that Lord is very publicly campaigning against women's spaces but has apparently said nothing about men's ones.

Only thing missing from the article is a photograph of Mx Lord (I think that's the right form of appellation for someone who uses "they" pronouns), in full beard and Masonic regalia. Gives that human interest touch. Specially since the Masons explicitly limit membership to men.

Up to now transwomen have had to at least make a vague effort to follow female stereotypes to enter ladies toilets. With self id men won't even need to do that. Any man will be able to use female facilities whenever they feel like it however stereotypically male they present.

This is what Sarah is ignoring.

My focus is on the misrepresentation in the Sunday Times article. In terms of how people's gender will be defined by the City of London - we don't know. We will have to see.