Bristol City Council consulting on new trans policy

The no email thing is strange. Does it mean they are not accountable to which responses they count. How will we know if our views have been taken and not put in the delete box as incomplete or some other reason.
I couldn't complete the gender question or sexual orientation because they mixed sex and gender so I told them that.

I live in Bristol and have just completed it but it didn’t ask for an email address. I’m interested to know who is pushing this. Will be contacting local members and MP (who probably won’t care what I, a middle aged woman, thinks) but at least they can’t pretend they didn’t know about it when this policy results in women and girls being assaulted (which it will).

It didn’t ask me for an email address.

Just a reminder that the consultation finishes today:
www.ask.bristol.gov.uk/trans-inclusion-and-gender-diversity-policy-consultation

It is so "lots of women complained earlier, so we thought about it and decided to ignore them and do what Stonewall wanted"

Thank you for this summary, it's no wonder I was confused when reading it

Bumping for the morning crew.

I've just read through all of this and made notes to complete in the morning. They really do not consider women and girls at all if they do they totally dismiss concerns. This is a sham consultation.
They don't define sex or sexual orientation. Though later it is clear by sexual orientation they mean same gender.
They include agender is under the trans umbrella but then also say it means someone who rejects gender identity. So that doesn't make sense.
They swap terminology all the time but mainly they mean gender identity.
They say a transwoman is assigned male at birth and lives as a woman. With no explanation.
They they mix in looking masculine or feminine.
They talk about the correct gender being on a GRC when really it means having the opposite sex on your birth certificate.
Talks about using wrong pronouns but in some scenarios it is necessary to use sex based pronouns.
They talk about filling forms in and having questions on gender but don't talk about sex. Is this still being collected?
Basically they are introducing self ID.
Use women only and men only services as opposed to single sex services.
The phrase transphobia....can include greatly exaggerated fears - this is not neutral language.

Also use a phrase about women's fears not being a legitimate reason to exclude transwomen!

They refer to GEO document from 2015.

Awful document written only from a trans perspective, very biased, but then if they believe TWAW what do we expect.

done - didn't ask me for an email address

Done

Closing date 9th October, so assume tomorrow is the last possible day.

Bumping. I’ve just done my response. I’m pretty furious and half a bottle of wine down but gave it my best shot. Took me about an hour. Anyone thinking about doing it and not yet got round to it, please do.

Because of the issues at the start with making the documents available, I believe the deadline for comments is now 9th Oct - one week from now. Still good to get comments in ASAP though.

If you haven't had a chance please complete.
Bristol is entirely unaware this is happening, and most people genuinely wouldn't believe it.
Self id by the back door.

Finally written to Thangham my MP and also written to my local councillor - I can't be silent any longer! Luckily I work for myself

No need to apologise! Thar sounds horribly scary.....
I do think there is a wilful ignoring of how having men in the toilet will be triggering for victims of SA who are hypervigilant in lonely places. I've had similar experience and when I bought it up witha TWAW type I got told that was my problem and I should consider therapy - they just want to pee.
I also think there is a lack of consideration of the number of men who have a fetish for listening to women pee/poo. I think its a NAMALT problem

AdamRyan · Today 15:08
What I mean though is many of the TRAs deliberately focus on toilets as it makes women look unreasonable - doors can be locked, it's a basic human bodily function, in and out, wash hands, what's the issue bigot.
When to me it's a slippery slope and we'd be much better talking about changing facilities as its much more obvious why women wouldn't want to be changing next to male bodied people of any gender identity.

I do see what you mean but I was once trapped in a toilet late at night alone with a wanker waiting outside the cubicle blocking the exit door and stairs to the outside. As it was a ladies’, in the split second.it took to see him, I also could know something was wrong a- he shouldn’t have been there. This gave me the edge of time and force to barge past him very fast and and get out and away.

If the same man had been ‘allowed’ I would have paused to check: is he really wanking? What’s happening? All my capacity for a fast and forceful reaction would be gone.

It isn’t petty to say no men in potentially lonely places.

Also, the lack of privacy is horrible even behind a cubicle door. I remember some comment by a man about Judy Garland, “She even tinkles pretty”. Just horrible. And that’s without people who may be getting sexual pleasure via association.

Sorry for the rant

I know.
What I mean though is many of the TRAs deliberately focus on toilets as it makes women look unreasonable - doors can be locked, it's a basic human bodily function, in and out, wash hands, what's the issue bigot.
When to me it's a slippery slope and we'd be much better talking about changing facilities as its much more obvious why women wouldn't want to be changing next to male bodied people of any gender identity.

Just filled it in. But I didn't have to give an email address - have they changed it? Hope my reply still counts!

Thank you severnboring for the reminder and for the really helpful links.

Holding my breath BCC will listen (hahahahaa)

AdamRyan · Today 08:35
I just filled it in.

Pulled them up a bit on gym/pool changing rooms being affected as well as toilets. They are clearly deploying the "just need to pee" school of argument and its disingenuous.

I also put in the barrier this would cause to some cultures.

it might be said that if a trans woman ‘just needs to pee’ she could go to the men’s lavatories. If she feels that would be unsafe for her, even if it would be expedient, then perhaps she could sympathise with how women and girls may feel equally ill at ease when males, even those identifying as women, use the ladies’.

Thanks for this. I suggest contacting councillors too as I feel this is being pushed through at a local level mostly

I just filled it in.
Pulled them up a bit on gym/pool changing rooms being affected as well as toilets. They are clearly deploying the "just need to pee" school of argument and its disingenuous.
I also put in the barrier this would cause to some cultures.

severnboring · 27/08/2022 13:33
They've been sneaky.

The pull quote for the section on single sex services:

“If you are accessing a service provided for men-only or women-only, the organisation providing it should treat you

according to your gender identity. In very restricted circumstances it is lawful for an organisation to provide a

different service or to refuse the service to someone who is undergoing, intends to undergo or has undergone

gender reassignment” Equality and Human Rights Commission8"

The quote is from the EHRC's webpage on gender reassignment discrimination, last updated 22/12/21 (www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/gender-reassignment-discrimination)

(as an aside the EHRC need to update!!)

They do not quote from the 4/4/22 EHRC page on sex and gender reassginment discrim - www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/protecting-people-sex-and-gender-reassignment-discrimination

which says:

"In the Equality Act 2010 the protected characteristic of sex protects people from being discriminated against because of being a man or a woman (Equality Act 2010, Section 11) – defined as a male or female of any age (Equality Act 2010, Section 212 (1)). ‘Sex’ is understood as binary – being male or female – with a person’s legal sex being determined by what is recorded on their birth certificate, based on biological sex.....
Exceptions in the Act set out circumstances in which it is permissible to treat someone less favourably because of their sex or gender reassignment, for reasons of public policy or to protect the rights of others. The sex exceptions operate on the basis of legal sex. The gender reassignment exceptions are not determined by whether or not an individual has a Gender Recognition Certificate (the one exception to this relates to the solemnisation of marriage through religious ceremony – Equality Act 2010, Schedule 3, paragraph 24). The use of such exceptions generally needs to be justified as being a proportionate way to achieve a legitimate objective."

or the subsequent 27/4/22 new single sex spaces guidance from EHRC:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-guide-equality-act-sex-and-gender

That is more than sneaky. It is misleadng. Shouldn’t they be asked to clarify why they are using out of date information?
Perhaps people who live in Bristol could ask their MP to question this too.

Bloody hell that was awful. Like stepping back to 2018.