Civil Service Trans policy - what can I do?

For instance, do employers who adopt these policies expect women with sexual violence history to explain their reasons, or should they just quietly switch to using accessible toilets?

Absolutely unacceptable to expect women to demonstrate or prove this and 'out' themselves, so women would need to self identify. And whatever they call those toilets, those toilets will need increasing in number as they will be very busy.

In the last 20 years or so local and national government have gone to significant lengths to identify marginalised groups and ensure that they were welcomed and integrated to society.

Yup. See loads of highly expensive white papers and actions regarding ghettoization, women restricted to their homes, lack of access to learning English and education, anti terrorism strategies, a ton of stuff. All hurled aside in one go.

I'm left wondering: either there's some deeply sinister, dark global plan the govt are signed up to which outweighs every other interest, or it's simply that the govt's left hand doesn't know what the fuck it's right's hand's doing. Or even that the right hand exists.

The level of incompetence is gobsmacking.

Excellent posts about women who can't share toilets, showers and changing rooms with men.
In the last 20 years or so local and national government have gone to significant lengths to identify marginalised groups and ensure that they were welcomed and integrated to society. Muslim women in particular were targeted by sports bodies, community groups, education etc.
It just shows how integrated into the civil service pornified / creepy men are so that they (without any hesitation) prioritise the rights of similar men and in a heartbeat, these marginalised groups of women (and others) are immediately excluded from so many aspects of society.

I would be questioning what provision is going to be made for that percentage (and I'm assuming it will be substantial) who therefore cannot be expected to share toilets with natal males.

Exactly, and what is the reasoning that allows the feelings of males to trump those of women who, for whatever reason, are uncomfortable sharing toilets with males. For instance, do employers who adopt these policies expect women with sexual violence history to explain their reasons, or should they just quietly switch to using accessible toilets?

Are there any statistics for a) the number of women whose faith/belief prohibits them from sharing toilet facilities with natal males and b) how many women are the victims of sexual abuse/physical assault/coercive control by natal males?

I would be questioning what provision is going to be made for that percentage (and I'm assuming it will be substantial) who therefore cannot be expected to share toilets with natal males. Do they all have to be regarded as disabled for toileting and how is that going to impact on the availability of accessible toilets for people already using them?

The gov.uk page signposting the Equality and Human Rights Commission was quietly amended last week following a number of complaints by MNers and there was, of course, Penny Mordaunt's webchat (which must have been an eye-opener for her even though she ducked and dived). I'd like to think this has all the makings of a perfect storm and someone somewhere in Whitehall is finally waking up but as so many others have pointed out on so many other threads, vigilance and persistence are key.

In Civil Service-speak, this usually means "OMG, we've got it wrong but can't admit it so we'll say we are 'revising' it instead".
Yep, the policy document which has now vanished stated "March 2016 interim revised edition subject to Civil Service Employee Policy Review".
It sat there for three years - quite a coincidence that someone decided to review it now.

It was revised in 2016, and now requires further revision to bring it up to date and broaden the scope. Therefore, it has been removed from this page.

In Civil Service-speak, this usually means "OMG, we've got it wrong but can't admit it so we'll say we are 'revising' it instead".

I only got an auto-reply from my MP when I brought it to her attention and I'm still waiting for even that from the Home Secretary. To be fair, the B-word seems to be taking up pretty much most of their time at the moment so I was expecting a bit of a wait. Still, the fact that it's been removed while it awaits "revision" could be hopeful....as long as the replacement document is not put together or nodded through by the numpties who approved the original one.

Will wait and watch.

She's fine. She's just not posting on MN any more.

Just read this for the first time ... What happened to trousering?

So a woman asserting her autonomy to protect herself from a perceived threat is now punishable offence because "the poor menz feelz".

I'd have found it hard to bite my tongue in that meeting - all credit to you for holding it together.

They are including men who change roles for erotics factors in the group of people they are giving permission to use facilities of their choice quite explicitly here aren't they? So condoning the erotic and sexualised behaviour at work. Definitely a a conflict with a sexual harassment policy.

Quite. Implementing legally-sanctionedsrlf-ID for such a broadly defined transgender population would provide sexually-motivated cross fressers legal cover to practise their fetish in the presence of unconsenting women and minor children. Unacceptable.

If I had a DSD I imagine I'd be fairly private about it. Certainly at work. I wouldn't be announcing it on any forms requiring me to tick a box marked sex gender. I probably wouldn't tell anyone unless there was a good reason to do so eg for medical/ time off work reasons. And I'd be very pissed off at being lumped in with trans for policy matters. They could fuck off with that.

Gender identity is a completely different thing from Intersex. As I understand it, intersex representation groups have asked to be kept out of transideology, because transideology has nothing to do with disorders of sex development.

So why is the Civil Service conflating them deliberately, and producing a "Gender Identity and Intersex Model Policy Package"?

I mean, what the fuck? This seems deliberately provocative.

News:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-workplace-and-gender-reassignment/the-workplace-and-gender-reassignment

Civil Service

Guidance
The Workplace and Gender Reassignment
Updated 21 March 2019

The Workplace and Gender Reassignment, published by a:gender, the cross government network for trans, intersex and non binary civil servants, has provided invaluable guidance to departments since 2011.It was revised in 2016, and now requires further revision to bring it up to date and broaden the scope. Therefore, it has been removed from this page.

Civil Service HR Employee Policy, working closely with a:gender and others, will shortly be publishing a Gender Identity and Intersex Model Policy Package, to provide information, guidance and support to government Departments in relation to gender identity issues for civil servants and their managers, including issues connected with gender reassignment.

This package will be available through departmental HR departments. In the meantime, for further information and advice, contact a:gender:[email protected]

That's very good to hear! Thanks Eresh. And to Trousering. Brave lady, and she inspired me to write to MP again, sharing the policy conflicts with him. So far he's hiding under his desk again, but he can't say he wasn't told.

That's great news, thanks for passing it on Eresh.

Excellent. That's quite a result.

Hi all

The lovely Trousering, who I am in contact with off the board and is not on MN now, has asked me to post an update.

She has just heard back from the director of diversity and inclusion at the Russell group uni she mentioned, that in response to the email they are changing policies back to gender reassignment and sex. This was received civilly and uncontroversially with recognition of the conflict.

So that's a win.

She says she is not leaving it there as they have skirted round the harassment issue she raised. She will be pressing them further on this, including letting them know of the QC opinion upthread, and will update again.

She also says that there is no detriment to her for raising this and so she suggests we should be brave and try to speak up at work.

Me too, Trousering count me in for crowd funding

link here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3527477-Declaration-on-Womens-Sex-Based-Rights-IWD2019

Pleased to see the declaration today. I have used that in a follow up email.

Interesting Trousering

Although also many issues with 'meaningful transition'.

This is the way the GRA will most likely go: all freedoms to women's facilities limited to GRC holders (no to self ID), BUT getting a GRC will be made something casually achievable with very little gatekeeping by anyone who feels so inclined, regardless of their reasons.

End of women's single sex spaces or women's right to privacy, dignity and freedom to undress or toilet apart from any male who wishes to be with them.

No. The floodgates have been opened, it's been demonstrated that 'any' males allowed to use women's spaces just descends into a battle of how far that window can be pushed. Women have a right to single sex spaces without sacrificing this to validate the chosen identity of males, and it is impossible to change sex. Third spaces please.

Me too.

I’d be happy to contribute as well

Count me in for any crowd funding.