LGB Conservatives think the Tory party is captured too.

I admit I was shocked that people were treating the pledges signed by Keir Starmer and the ones from the other anti-trans group as one and the same.

One set of pledges left the space for compromise fully open, the other said things like "there is no conflict between the rights of transwomen and women" and demanded widespread expulsions of Labour members who had the temerity to disagree.

It just feels that this whole issue is becoming so polarised and soon there'll be no space for anyone who isn't firmly on one side or the other. Are transwomen women? Well, no, if that means someone can wake up one morning and declare themselves a woman and that's it; on the other hand I do regard the likes of Jan Morris as being a woman. And the space to say stuff like that seems to be disappearing fast.

Re the employment of the intern: Civil Service recruiters don’t get the names of applicants (a measure to try to ensure open and fair recruitment) and the recruitment training explicitly advises against - or it certainly used to - googling interviewees on the grounds that HR cannot be expected to justify a decision not to recruit someone that was based on something outwith the recruitment process (the recruitment process obviously including DBS checks & references). Also some CS positions receive hundreds and hundreds of applications - I once had over 1500 to sift through for one vacancy - so if you think anyone in an underfunded, staff-slashed-to-the-bone CS HR department has time to google that lot, you don’t understand the constraints of the modern CS.

The Service has been captured, no doubt about that, but to think the intern’s application should have been weeded out by a quick google is laughable naive.

Those sort of policies are what every Conservative Government does or says. And unlike trans issue (where there are real concerns about legality of guidance and statute being changed to alter fundamental rights) you would expect cuts and to deliver Brexit.

This is not a socially progressive government. Bad then that the Labour Party have given up real social policy for women - but they are certainly worse for women on a fundamental level than the Conservatives to judge from last week’s expel me debacle.

Are we really going to spend the next five years looking at women's rights entirely through the prism of one issue and ignoring everything else the Tories will do to fuck up women's lives?

Well of course not, but equally I've never seen all the other parties line up to back a policy that would remove my rights. So if a government I didn't vote for actually protects my rights then yes, I will be very happy about that.

HPFA If the meaning of the very word woman can't be defined none of the other issues matter.
Sex based rights are at the heart of slot of what you listed, from elderly care needing the right to same sex careers, to your very post about how the Tories will impact women.

I seem to be getting some sense on here that so long as the Tories stick with no self ID all their other policies are somehow less important.

They are planning a pretty massive assault on protecting your rights against the government with a review of judicial review plus the most economically damaging Brexit with all that entails in terms of cuts to public services which will have the most impact on women.

Plus a fair amount from Suella Braverman and similar on "people caring more for their own families" which will translate as "cuts in social services that mean you'll get no help in looking after your elderly relatives."

Are we really going to spend the next five years looking at women's rights entirely through the prism of one issue and ignoring everything else the Tories will do to fuck up women's lives?

Exactly as @R0wantrees said. What is interesting I think is the complete lack of loyalty this government has with the last May or even Cameron government, so I can imagine them distancing themselves from the failings of the last 10 years as they position themselves as a different breed. How long this lasts or how deep it goes is another matter.

While there are elements of genderism that fits with conservatism (individualism etc), overall it is seen as a progressive cultural obsession that repels "ordinary" voters.

The Conservatives have responsibility for what are effectively 'self id' public policies & serious Safeguarding & due process failures.

Totally agree.

TheRealMcKenna

Yes apologies it was a general point which Id intended to make earlier in the discussion.

The Conservatives have responsibility for what are effectively 'self id' public policies & serious Safeguarding & due process failures.

R0wantrees I don’t dispute any of your points.

All I was saying (rather flippantly, I admit) is that I don’t think it’s in the interests of the tories at this point to go any further down the line towards self-ID Or reforming the GRA.

I don’t argue that they have a whole host of other issues to address based on where they or government institutions currently stand.

All they have to do is say that they do not intend to alter the GRA at his point in time and the only people they will piss off will be those who would never have voted for them anyway.

What the Conservative Government need to do is address the many Safeguarding failures which are happening now & during the period they have been in power.

Senior medics whistle blew Duty of Care concerns over a year ago at NHS Tavistock children's service.

Vulnerable females have been (continue to be) locked in prison with males.

NHS ward policies allow males to self-id onto women's wards & female shower facilities.

Mermaids & Stonewall (self described lobby groups) are influencing children's education & school policy.

Social Workers are being hampered in raising serious Safeguarding breeches due to trans-inclusive policies.

then there's the police, the judiciary, the civil service etc

Aside from the need for a thorough investigation into the failings of Maria Miller MPs Trans Enquiry report & the influence of single issue lobby groups on ministers & government policy.

All they have to do is say that they do not intend to alter the GRA at his point in time and the only people they will piss off will be those who would never have voted for them anyway.

They won't be doing this because they probably will, at some point, be changing it.

This is an open goal for the tories at the moment. They can see that Labour have caused an internal civil war over the issue in recent days. To take the same position would be ridiculous.

All they have to do is say that they do not intend to alter the GRA at his point in time and the only people they will piss off will be those who would never have voted for them anyway.

I think anyone who has not read the PM’s own words disclaiming the actions of the police in pursuing twitter transphobes should; and I think if you are a civil servant, it might also be wise to not be the person who starts putting forward proposals on further trans measures.

Civil service is not a monolith - and depending on the state of play then certain people are forward and some out.

The Harry the Owl case will probably mean a review of lots of trans policy - across the board.

There are aspects of genderism that fit right into Conservative thinking and the instinctive reaction to any mention of privacy is one of them. It's not an accident that the Goodwin case which led to the GRA was fought and won on privacy. Self-Id can be constructed as a Conservative policy all right - letting people 'be who they are' without 'state interference'. Activists like Sue Pascoe will always lobby quietly about this and they will find fertile ground in the party. Lesbian feminist activism by Labour members like Selina Todd and Prof Kathryn Stock will not always look great to Conservatives.

Any party with a majority starts neglecting its cannon fodder MPs. So I agree for those with a Tory MP, lobbying around sport, children and prisons are strong areas to get them thinking when they are feeling put upon by the central party regime.

This crop of tories are populists. And gender ideology is not popular. There was a story pre election about the potential for Johnson to "weaponise" this issue to drum up support for his side. I'm wondering, if seeing the coverage, that the tories go after this issue in quite high profile ways. Almost as a marker of "us vs them", where the metropolitan elite want to sterilise you're kids and do drag in libraries while the tories representing ex red wall British values will protect the country from this nonsense. (Read the last sentence in Johnson's voice).

Hmmmm might be wrong, but feels like a way for them to win with their voters on an culture issue where there is little cost to them (as few tories are pro gender ideology). Although could just be wishful thinking!

Lobbying your MP might help push it up the agenda!

" But the question is, will they be doing anything to stop the creep of self ID in institutions? I don't think they will unless they are forced into it by public outcry."

that is exactly what I'm concerned about.

Though I still think the GRC has been made redundant by equal marriage.

KB is my MP, although I believe she’s currently on mat leave and I can’t see any details of upcoming surgeries.

So does anyone hold the portfolio currently, or is it not important enough to cover?

I doubt the Tories will be doing anything with the GRA. But the question is, will they be doing anything to stop the creep of self ID in institutions? I don't think they will unless they are forced into it by public outcry.

Ah, Slater. I've been trying to remember his name.

"Slater joined Her Majesty's Civil Service in 2001 into the Cabinet Office, having worked for Islington Borough Council.[1][3] After four years there, he did a stint in the Prime Minister's Delivery Unit at Number 10 in 2005, working on NHS reform and the capability review programme. In 2006, he moved to the Ministry of Justice,[3] working in the National Offender Management Service as its Director of Performance & Improvement, and then in 2008 as Chief Executive of the Office for Criminal Justice Reform before being promoted in 2009 to be Director-General, Transformation.[3][4][1]"

I'd be interested to know how influential he was in housing male prisoners in the female estate.

Binterested Safe Schools Alliance have some excellent sample letters on their website.

The civil service have definitely been captured; look what this man got a Stonewall award for; introducing ‘gender neutral’ toilets.
www.stonewall.org.uk/people/senior-champion-year-2019-jonathan-slater

Correction to my last post - Kemi Badenoch is also now Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury.

She is an interesting woman. Here is a 2017 interview from Conservative Home in which she describes herself as a "cultural Christian" and an "associate Catholic" because she is married to a Catholic. She has also spoken before about how she approaches everyday situations - such as getting into taxis - very differently to her husband, because she is a woman.

I'm hopeful.

www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2017/12/interview-kemi-badenoch-im-not-really-left-leaning-on-anything-i-always-lean-right-instinctively.html

I think Badenoch is a junior Minister reporting to the Cabinet Minister, Liz Truss, who still has overall respnsibility

order-order.com/2020/02/14/reshuffle-live-6/

Agreed. The civil service are the major problem - they are in a position to influence and manipulate policy and legislation with little or no consequences - despite the guidance in the Nolan principles on conduct in public life.

As someone who grew up with "Yes, Minister", I suspect the Civil Service is a far bigger problem than the government of the day

TimeLady
I think that is an excellent point. The government can be ejected in an election, but the civil service are a permanent presence. This is institutional capture and its insidious effects.