Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

UNISON passes policy Trans Equality - Louder and Prouder

163 replies

frazzled1 · 15/06/2022 21:23

twitter.com/JamesAnthonyRN/status/1537022734953328640

“Trans women are women, trans men are men, non binary identities are valid”

UNISON passes policy Trans Equality - Louder and Prouder
UNISON passes policy Trans Equality - Louder and Prouder
OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
RepresentMe · 19/06/2024 12:50

Yes Tinsel - quite understand!

WickedSerious · 19/06/2024 11:58

tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 16/06/2022 16:12

Please be specific? Exactly what is transphobic?

It'll be that damned reality again won't it?

TinselAngel · 19/06/2024 10:55

RepresentMe · 19/06/2024 10:46

Are you a member Tinsel? Can we change it from within?

I've decided Trans Widows is enough of a battle for me. Somebody else will have to take on Unison. I'm still a member but no longer an activist.

RepresentMe · 19/06/2024 10:46

Are you a member Tinsel? Can we change it from within?

TinselAngel · 19/06/2024 10:29

RepresentMe · 19/06/2024 10:05

I see Munroe Bergdorf gave a keynote speech yesterday at the Unison Conference in Brighton. I’ve been wondering if Unison had shifted their position at all - I’m guessing not?

Jesus. I'm glad I don't go to Unison conferences any more.

RepresentMe · 19/06/2024 10:05

I see Munroe Bergdorf gave a keynote speech yesterday at the Unison Conference in Brighton. I’ve been wondering if Unison had shifted their position at all - I’m guessing not?

Offtobednow · 20/06/2022 11:26

I have been a member of Unison for years, and have just cancelled my Direct Debit. I have rung to inform them and explained why.
As a nurse I often need to advocate for my patients. I do not currently feel that Unison would support me if I wanted to speak up for my female patients who may not believe transwomen are women, and who need to feel safe when they are at their most vulnerable.

Thelnebriati · 19/06/2022 18:22

They are legally protected as the opposite sex assigned at birth via gender reassignment.
No @SunbowRainshine31 people are treated as the sex on their birth certificate. Anything else would be self ID. Single sex services can also exclude trans people even with a GRC. Here's a source even you can't argue with;
www.transactual.org.uk/the-gender-recognition-act

JenniferAlisonPhilipaSue · 19/06/2022 12:10

I'm a member of unison but I've been torn as to whether or not to leave.

They helped me massively when I was experiencing disability discrimination and I got a great settlement as a result.

However, I don't like their TWAW approach, and I need to find ways to save money in the cost of living crisis.

My current employer does not recognise a union so not sure if there's a point in staying a member, but they are doing redundancies, does any other members know if I should stay a member?

babyjellyfish · 19/06/2022 07:01

SunbowRainshine31 · 18/06/2022 23:52

Thats a semantic mess.

They are legally protected as the opposite sex assigned at birth via gender reassignment.

They have legally transitioned.

But they havent legally changed sex on the birth certificate without a GRC.

Both these statements are true.

And in fact, even liz truss has stated trans people DO have access to the spaces that match their gender without a GRC, as also Ann Sinnot found out in court.

Talk about a semantic mess.

Nothing is assigned at birth.

And there is no such thing as spaces which match someone's gender, because gender is completely imaginary and based in sexist stereotypes which most of the people who purportedly share that gender (based on nothing more than them not being in denial about their SEX) don't even identify with.

It is aggressively and offensively anti-feminist to redefine women as people who are stereotypically feminine for literally no reason other than to deny them the right to keep male people out of their toilets, changing rooms, prisons and sports (to their own detriment).

Waitwhat23 · 19/06/2022 04:25

As always -

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

Human beings cannot change sex. Even the legal fiction of a GRC doesn't change that. The single sex exemptions stated in the link above make that clear, despite the foot stamping from MRA/TRA/incels.

And assigned at birth 🙄. Just white noise now I'm afraid.

Bosky · 19/06/2022 03:12

SunbowRainshine31 · 18/06/2022 23:52

Thats a semantic mess.

They are legally protected as the opposite sex assigned at birth via gender reassignment.

They have legally transitioned.

But they havent legally changed sex on the birth certificate without a GRC.

Both these statements are true.

And in fact, even liz truss has stated trans people DO have access to the spaces that match their gender without a GRC, as also Ann Sinnot found out in court.

SunbowRainshine31 - "trans people DO have access to the spaces that match their gender without a GRC"

So you are admitting that there is currently an unfair, inequitable, illegal presumption in favour of the protected characteristic of "Gender Reassignment", to the discriminatory detriment of other relevant Protected Characteristics?

Remind me again how TW are the most marginalised, oppressed and powerless demographic?

I hope you enjoyed your brief moment in history, queering the narrative, putting the boot even more firmly on our necks while squealing that you were being oppressed by the evil menstruators, child-birthers and venerable crones.

Now eff off back to Porn Hob. You don't belong here and you know it. That's your tragedy and none of give a flying F*ck.

We only have one life. Sort yourself out.

SunbowRainshine31 · 18/06/2022 23:52

Thelnebriati · 18/06/2022 23:27

The Equality Act names the protected characteristic as gender reassignment. Its illegal to discriminate against someone or harass them because of their protected characteristic. They gain that protection from the point at which they announce they are embarking on the process. (There is also an expectation in the EA that they will go on to take hormones and have SRS.)

Protection from discrimination does not mean they have legally transitioned. A persons legal sex is the sex recorded on their birth certificate. They can only obtain an amended birth certificate after they have been awarded a Gender Recognition Certificate.
Announcing they are trans does not give a man the right to use a women's single sex facility.

Thats a semantic mess.

They are legally protected as the opposite sex assigned at birth via gender reassignment.

They have legally transitioned.

But they havent legally changed sex on the birth certificate without a GRC.

Both these statements are true.

And in fact, even liz truss has stated trans people DO have access to the spaces that match their gender without a GRC, as also Ann Sinnot found out in court.

Thelnebriati · 18/06/2022 23:27

The Equality Act names the protected characteristic as gender reassignment. Its illegal to discriminate against someone or harass them because of their protected characteristic. They gain that protection from the point at which they announce they are embarking on the process. (There is also an expectation in the EA that they will go on to take hormones and have SRS.)

Protection from discrimination does not mean they have legally transitioned. A persons legal sex is the sex recorded on their birth certificate. They can only obtain an amended birth certificate after they have been awarded a Gender Recognition Certificate.
Announcing they are trans does not give a man the right to use a women's single sex facility.

SunbowRainshine31 · 18/06/2022 23:16

Thelnebriati · 17/06/2022 16:58

If they don't have a GRC they haven't transitioned. They just identify as trans. That doesn't cause so many legal problems for the partner trying to leave, as documents still exist in their name.

The exit clause means they can receive an interim GRC until the spouse has left the marriage and everything is settled. No one is being prevented from transitioning or receiving a GRC.

I think you mean a legal transition in terms of recorded sex on the birth certificate.

A trans person is still legally transitioned as-per equality legislation with or without a GRC.

One is the GRA, the other is the EA2010.

Bosky · 18/06/2022 15:00

ZuttZeVootEeeVo · 18/06/2022 08:36

Because some men can look like women, you are conflicted on the idea that women and girls should have words to describe themselves that exclude men?

TiTINATrance I think the way out of feeling conflicted might be to recognise that things are very different now than they were in 2004 when the GRA was passed.

2004

  1. "Trans" meant "transsexual" and in the UK this conjured up public images of glamorous models April Ashley and "Bond Girl" Tula (Caroline Cossey), tweedy travel writer Jan Morris, and Hayley Cropper (Coronation Street character played by not-trans actress Julie Hesmondhalgh).

  2. Most transsexuals who could "pass" went "stealth". That this was the norm, or at least the intention, is reflected in the prohibition in the GRA against "outing" by someone who learned in an official capacity that a transsexual had applied for or been granted a GRC.

Section 22 - Prohibition on disclosure of information
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/22

Successful "stealthing" was framed as a "legal privacy" issue for the transsexual rather than a non-consensual intrusion on the privacy of others.

  1. The GRA codified "transsexuals" as people who had a specific psychiatric diagnosis:

“gender dysphoria” means the disorder variously referred to as gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder and transsexualism,

Section 25 - Interpretation
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/25

  1. The main purpose of the GRA 2004 was to enable same-sex marriage by the back door, ie. transsexuals were understood to be homosexual in the real sense of the word.

  2. Transsexuals were understood by the general public to be very different people to "transvestites" (aka "cross-dressers"), professional "female impersonators" and "drag artists". Many if not most "hobbyists" were heterosexual and most of the best-known professional performers were, at least officially, heterosexual.

2022
6) "Trans" means, in practice, anything that someone who calls themselves "trans" says it means, although the term "transsexual" is frowned upon by trans advocacy groups:

www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/setting_up_lgbt_011.pdf

  1. Promotion of the concept of a "trans umbrella" plus non-consensual mothballing of the term "transsexual" has resulted in the intentional blurring of distinctions between, for example, male cross-dressers, female impersonators, drag queens, eunuchs (men with a castration fetish), "furries", "other kin", "adult babies", etc.

  2. The GRA 2004 is still in force but lobbying and training by Stonewall and similar trans-advocacy organisations has resulted in statutory sector, voluntary sector and commercial organisations "going beyond the law" (breaking the law in some cases) in substituting "gender" and/or "gender identity" for "sex" and/or "gender reassignment" as a Protected Characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.

  3. The assaults on language and reality, and the determination of trans advocates to appropriate, twist and erode the meaning of the words "woman", "female" and "lesbian" present a real threat to the legal protections, privacy, dignity and safety of women and children.

For example,
Girl Guiding exempts males who self-ID as women from safe-guarding procedures that apply to all other male staff and volunteers 1 and GG sacked women who raised concerns:

www.mumsnet.com/search?q=girl%20guiding&topic%5B0%5D=Feminism%3A%20Sex%20%26%20gender%20discussions

  1. "Trans" in all its manifestations is no longer something to be "in the closet" about. "Out and Proud" is the thing. You cannot turn on the TV, listen to the radio, open a Newspaper, surf the internet, use Social Media, go to the Library, School, College, University, work, department store, coffee shop, etc. etc. without being forcefully reminded that TRANS PEOPLE EXIST!

  2. "Stealthing" is less likely to be in the news as tabloid "outing" than as the almost equally rare occurrence of a case of non-consensual sex by "deception as to gender": Justine McNally v R [2013]

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent#a11

  1. Women are now alert to the fact that males who cannot "pass", or who make absolutely no concessions to "passing", are aggressively invading what were once women's single sex spaces both on and off-line.

  2. Number 13 - unlucky for some or perhaps all of us? Successful "stealthing", previously framed as a "legal privacy" issue for the transsexual, is now understood as deceptive, non-consensual intrusion on the privacy of others and a threat to the legal standing and protection of women.

At a practical level, there is no reason on earth why a woman should assume that "passing" equates with a benign disposition, compassion for women or empathy for women. All the "lucky genes", cross-sex hormones and cosmetic surgery in the world cannot alter the fact that we live and die the same sex we are born.

At a societal level, those who "pass", do no favours to women by "stealthing". Just because they can "pass themselves off" as women it does not mean that they should.

All credit to those who have recognised the harm that they have done to women as a class by successfully "stealthing" and are intent on stopping being part of the problem of institutionalised reality denial and medico-pharmacological exploitation of children and vulnerable adults.

ZuttZeVootEeeVo · 18/06/2022 08:36

TitInATrance · 16/06/2022 07:41

I was a rep, retired member.
Not surprised but particularly disappointed in Unison who were always a particularly pro-woman union.

However, I am aware of two TW in my former workplace who did pass to anyone they hadn’t outed themselves to - so whilst GC I am a little bit conflicted.

Because some men can look like women, you are conflicted on the idea that women and girls should have words to describe themselves that exclude men?

babyjellyfish · 18/06/2022 07:20

No worries, easily done!

Bosky · 17/06/2022 22:40

babyjellyfish · 17/06/2022 15:33

I'm not the one calling you names!

I'm totally on your side.

Just wondering what the spousal veto is and how it would work, exactly.

Does it mean the trans spouse wouldn't be able to get a GRC unless their spouse consented? Because at the moment hardly anyone gets a GRC anyway.

Huge apologies babyjellyfish! I got you muddled up with the time-wasters!

(Mortified and contrite! 😳)

FrippEnos · 17/06/2022 21:25

Has @SunbowRainshine31 defined what a woman is yet?

I realise that even asking this makes me a far right Mat Walsh supporter but it really does seem to be the right place to start.

babyjellyfish · 17/06/2022 21:08

Thanks @TinselAngel.

TinselAngel · 17/06/2022 21:01

See this excellent article by Jo Bartosch for more information about the Spousal Exit Clause

thecritic.co.uk/til-trans-do-us-part/

TinselAngel · 17/06/2022 20:58

DodoPatrol · 17/06/2022 15:43

I was wondering that too, BabyJellyFish. If the marriage is annulled, does the wife find that she has never been married to the person concerned and thus have no claim for a split of marital assets including pension?

No. It's a voidable marriage not a void marriage.

TinselAngel · 17/06/2022 20:58

Thelnebriati · 17/06/2022 16:58

If they don't have a GRC they haven't transitioned. They just identify as trans. That doesn't cause so many legal problems for the partner trying to leave, as documents still exist in their name.

The exit clause means they can receive an interim GRC until the spouse has left the marriage and everything is settled. No one is being prevented from transitioning or receiving a GRC.

This is correct.

TinselAngel · 17/06/2022 20:56

What would be the financial consequences of an annulment as opposed to a divorce though?
The financial consequences are the same either way.

Swipe left for the next trending thread