Civil Service Trans policy - what can I do?

Maybe we need to consign those stick figures to recycling and redefine toilets by the urinatory process they facilitate and accomodate.

Penis toliets and Urethra toilets.

I would do pretty much the same thing, IDoNotCare, and in fact, having had many years of attending courts, would offer just one piece of advice - if they were ever daft enough to charge me, I'd insist on exercising my right to be tried in the Crown Court and not the Magistrates Court. It would have to be a pretty unusual jury that would convict me.

In the meantime, I've just now emailed my MP and also Sajid Javid. Let's see them pick the bones out of this one.

I am beyond furious.

I will fight like a fucking beast if any male tries to put their hands on me or my youngest, who has SN. I swear they will end up arresting me, because I will punch, headbut and do as much damage as possible to them. I will cause so much fuss that they can take me to court. I will let every paper know about it. Those bastards will not put their hands on me. I’m fucking furious that it has actually been put in writing that a woman has no right to refuse to let a man touch her! I don’t care how they identify.

Discrimination law no longer contains the previous specific bar to prevent transsexual people without gender recognition from searching individuals of their acquired gender"

If a member of the public objects to being dealt with by a transsexual staff member, this is an unacceptable objection. The incident should be managed in the same way as any other pressure to discriminate. It would usually be unlawful for a manager to comply with the wishes of that member of the public."

How do we attract Janice Turner's attention to this? This needs to splashed all over the press.

Regarding the woman who left the toilets - I would have thought she would have a very strong case for a charge of harassment or similar if any manager or another member of staff approached her to ask about her reason for leaving those toilets?

If a member of the public objects to being dealt with by a transsexual staff member, this is an unacceptable objection.

FUCKING HELL.

Every time people have raised this, we've been told and told, this will never happen.

There it is.

A woman may not refuse to be physically searched by a biological male who does not identify as male. Refusing to validate this identity and co operate by permitting their body to be invaded, however they feel about it, is unreasonable .

So smear tests. It will be unreasonable to refuse.

Intimate care in hospitals. Unreasonable to refuse.

I can't express my rage at this. Where was the consultation? Who voted for this? Which manifesto was it in? Where's the impact assessment? Who advised on this? What were their qualifications?

This needs to go to the national papers, right now. Daily Mail, Telegraph, The Times, please. Please. For fucks sake tell the general public Gilead is here.

Could this not be challenged by using legislation such as the Health and Safety at Work Act? Under the General duties of employers to their employees, it states

It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.

(2)Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular—

(e)the provision and maintenance of a working environment for his employees that is, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe, without risks to health, and adequate as regards facilities and arrangements for their welfare at work.

Could a woman argue that sharing a toilet with a male bodied person could pose a risk to her health and welfare at work, particularly if she had previously been a victim of sexual violence?

Discrimination law no longer contains the previous specific bar to prevent transsexual people without gender recognition from searching individuals of their acquired gender"

If a member of the public objects to being dealt with by a transsexual staff member, this is an unacceptable objection. The incident should be managed in the same way as any other pressure to discriminate. It would usually be unlawful for a manager to comply with the wishes of that member of the public."

SingingLily I just can't believe this!! I am beyond horrified.

It's incredibly badly written it makes me wonder whether it's actually been read by the people who signed it off.

My DD is considering the civil service, but won't be impressed by this.

SingingLily - great idea and we should all be writing to our MPs and Sect Of State. The 8th of March would be an excellent opportunity to link with, but there's also no time like the present.

Actually, I’d be anonymously sending the entire pile of Woke Bullshit to the press.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant

My local council has more or less the same policy in place. In effect, self-ID is allowed and women have to comply with the Borg-mind. Resistance is futile.

I've just looked at the document, DoxxMeTwice, and it goes from bad to worse. Bearing in mind that "civil servants" includes both border agency and prison officers, consider this:

Section) 11 Searching
"Discrimination law no longer contains the previous specific bar to prevent transsexual people without gender recognition from searching individuals of their acquired gender".

(Section) 8 Dealing With/Attitudes of the Public
"Transsexual people are always aware of the possibility of harassment or even violence against them, perpetrated for no more reason than the victim is a transsexual person. Managers should be similarly aware in occupations where this is a risk. If a member of the public objects to being dealt with by a transsexual staff member, this is an unacceptable objection. The incident should be managed in the same way as any other pressure to discriminate. It would usually be unlawful for a manager to comply with the wishes of that member of the public."

In other words, a male prison officer who declares himself female may now carry out a full strip search on a woman prisoner - and that would include those (mercifully rare) occasions when the woman does not consent to being searched but there is lawful justification for carrying out a full search while she is being physically restrained. As someone who worked for many years with women in custody, I know that a disproportionately high number of those women have suffered years and years of abuse, largely at the hands of men. In which parallel universe would this be considered anything other than yet another form of abuse perpetrated on vulnerable and helpless women?

Similarly, and presumably, a woman travelling in or out of the country could potentially be searched by a male border agency worker who self-identified as female and there is nothing, absolutely nothing, the woman could do about it. Her objection would be deemed "unacceptable" and "discriminatory". Really? The Civil Service can override our rights to be treated decently and with dignity?

I'd say words fail me but actually, I can feel letters to my MP and the Home Secretary coming on....

C) those males who are determined to use women only facilities will have a monumental strop and start hanging around the Gynae clinics.

Nothing will change until the men are inconvenienced.

If as this muddled mess of words implies, anyone of any biological sex, with no physical transition of any kind, can use whichever sex's provisions by choice at any time - sex is now just a matter of choice instead of related to any reality - then why bother continuing with male and female provision at all?

Why not just turn all facilities unisex?

The answer being of course that a) men will kick off because they don't want unisex any more than women do - although push for this because men kicking off get listened to and b) the purpose of there being a designated women's space where women are.

Let’s face it - the type of male who demands that women remain when they feel scared/uneasy/violated is a nasty creature on a power trip. If they really did ‘feel like a woman’ they would empathise, apologise and leave. These are exactly the type of people who should not be permitted to enter women only spaces and this is exactly why.

So now it’s not only male bosdies that can be ‘female’ but also male patterned behaviour?

What happens in the case of individuals like Pip/Phillip Bunce who have two distinct identities and will sometimes be a man, othertimes not. But who is not transitioning as they plan on continuing to be a man on Sunday, Monday and Thursday and identify as a woman the rest of the time?

The guidance seems to be written very much from the view that the more is a single permanent transition rather than 5 times a week and thrice at weekends... might be an issue worth raising because obviously if you know them as a man half the time that’s different from someone doing one change.

(Well not really - all equally as bad but could be used to raise the female point of view!!)

What provision are they making for female employees with a faith or culture or disability that precludes them being able to share with someone of the opposite sex regardless of how that person chooses to identify?

My thoughts but knick says it better than I could.

Depending on the style of the toilets, the HSE might have the answer.

www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/toilets.htm

So females can now be compelled to remain in the presence of males to make the males feel validated.
I’m sorry but that’s fucking sick. If I want to leave the presence of a man I’ll do it for any reason I fucking like and I don’t have to explain myself.

If half the female staff will therefore be using the disabled loo, they need to provide a whole lot more disabled loos.

And what about rape survivors who don't want to share loos with male bodies, do they have to tell their employer or just start using disabled loos so that the "transitioner" can carry on using the women's?

Reference to the rights of religious mnorities is apposite. It was the need to accomodate Asian pupils that gave all girls the right to wear trousers to school.