An insurance company now wishes to lecture us

Oh deeeeeeeeeeeeear.

Oh! Don't know what to say really.

I wonder if they insure mixed sex rugby teams against liability for injury at the same rate as single sex ones?

Am surprised their actuaries are OK with this as a statement about their policies.

Doesn’t matter. Since December 2012 it has been illegal to discriminate by sex anyway. Life insurance - same for men and women. Car insurance - same for men and women. Annuity pricing - same for men and women.

Totally ruined the Sheila’s Wheels advert!

I'm half thinking of ringing Aviva tomorrow, quoting our policy numbers, and asking them if they still want our business? We pay a fairly hefty amount to them each month for life insurance/mortgage protection.

I'm almost 100% sure they would not want to lose our business - but if they did, plenty of other companies would step up.

Do Aviva insure sports people against injury?

I’ve just read that whole twitter thread it’s quite tame, just lots people saying great but Male bodies against Female bodies is unsafe and unfair. Them just point blank ignoring basic biology facts by shouting But we are inclusive.

It is possible to support the cause and not want women to be driven from sport altogether. It’s just like changing room, women can just stay out altogether just so small minority have free run. There is a way to make it work for everyone, denying there is no problem at all, dosnt just solve it.

Transwomen are women says an insurer. Interesting. Am surprised their actuaries are OK with this as a statement about their policies. Regulator might be interested.

@ BadgertheBodger - yup I’ve been there too.

“Right you fuckers - what fucking hell have you been up to? You are going to spend the rest of your career (about ten mins at this rate) licking fucking stamps in the post room!”

"Corporations now preach to us as Churchmen once did"

Ain't that the bloody truth!

Funny how in both cases, women, (the cunty kind) are discriminated against and bottom of the pile.

Gawd our life insurance is with Aviva. I'm pretty sure they're aware that a) I'm a woman, and DH is a man, and b) what that means.

Those tweets are utterly disingenuous. It's high time companies stopped letting interns and inexperienced twats loose on their twitter accounts!

In fact, DH and I had a financial adviser round to review our life insurance the other day. I can assure you 100% he wouldn't have rejected our cash on finding out I don't think TWAW.

What is it with these companies and political parties telling people "we don't want your business, or your vote, if you're a gender identity heretic? !

As someone who has actually been responsible for the marketing department this sort of thing brings me out in a cold sweat. I would not want to be Katie, or Katie’s boss tomorrow morning. Someone far further up the pecking order who likely gives no fucks about wokeness is most likely about to lose their shit.

It's not a complicated stance to get across - if we start to conflate protecting women's single sex categories with opposition to LGBT inclusion in sporting activities then that's the wrong way to go.

It's not if you're immersed in the issues. But corporate Woke signalling isn't about the issues, it's about brand promotion and it's as subtle as a brick. Most people know and talk about what they're pissed off about much more than they do what they like. If corporate signalling is all about the T while conflating it with the LGB and people are pissed off about the obvious nonsense of the T, the backlash won't distinguish.

Stonewall has let its core constituency down so badly. It won't end well.

Jeez Kate. Awkward

I would love the see the face on their boss tomorrow when they have a peek at the twitter feed to see how it’s all been going “you told a hundred customers to ‘fuck off and do one’?????”

Weirdly my Twitter shows only one response to that tweet - and it's not the OPs

Woke not wild!!

Their twitter people all have the same oblivious tone usually deployed by the wild don’t they? Ie someone says they’re going to cancel a policy and they basically say jog on, safe in the knowledge that they’re morally superior

Is like living in China or some state, and someone gets the phone call that they’ve heard you are not 100% behind the cause. Hence all shouting screaming and banner waving how wonderful things they are doing to support a small minority’s of LGBT people who don’t feel welcome in sport. I don’t think I know anyone who actual would feel welcomed or happy to go into sports for many other reasons.

If say 30% of your workforce is LGtB and 60% of them are happy in sport then (tries to do the maths)
12% of your work force don’t feel welcome. Why not make everyone more active and have work place teams etc. Can’t see how 82% of your workforce are all happy sporty need no encouragement to be active camp. Just bizzare.

There is a distinction that we must make between encouraging LGBT participation in sport, which I strongly support - sport really is for everyone, and no-one should feel or be excluded - and saying that therefore women's sport cannot be single-sex.
One does not equal the other.
I support Team GB's stance on LGBT inclusivity and acceptance in sport - however I do strongly oppose any move to remove the single-sex rights we have for female sport.
It's not a complicated stance to get across - if we start to conflate protecting women's single sex categories with opposition to LGBT inclusion in sporting activities then that's the wrong way to go.
Much like Labour's position on Brexit, nuance is key.

‘Sports for all! Let’s all get active!’ That’s all they needed to say, not bite the rainbow cherry... I blame the grownups in the room

This is the problem.

We're all for "inclusion of LGBT+++" in sports. Of course we are.
We're NOT all for LGBT+++ inclusion in womens sports at the expense of women.

If they'd put let's make sport inclusive for LGBTABC+ and women now that I would go for.