Sex Equality and Equity Network - Gender crit network for civil servants.

@Woman2023 in my department, the SEEN chairs fight tooth and nail to ensure people are protected and that unpleasant bullying posts are taken down and the authors held to appropriate standards of behaviour. there is out rage when they are told to wind their neck in, but it's working. Please join, even if you lurk. We need to stand together to overcome the climate of fear.

Hepwo · Yesterday 14:53

Well as this data shows less than half the Departments even took part in the election for an LGBT chair which is a massive amount of disinterest and the actual voting was from 800 people out of half a million so really, that's homeopathic proportions of relevance and should be treated accordingly.

Yes, it's utterly ridiculous that they can appoint them and to pretend that there's some sort of mandate.

SEEN will keep your identity secret. I'm pretty sure we can trust them.

Back to reality. I'm still nervous about joining SEEN due to being relatively new in the civil service and the sheer amount of nonsense blogs we get about pride and transgender awareness etc.

So "reminded of the 80s" and "get the impression that those with GC views are more likely"

All a bit wishy-washy huh?

Far from "intimidating" and "uncompromising".

This is in an office right?

Maybe intimidated isn’t the right word - but I have one colleague who’s a gender non-conforming lesbian in her 40s who I know is finding the whole situation really upsetting, because the things being said about trans people are reminding her strongly of the things that were said about gay people in the 80s and 90s, and she’s finding it quite traumatic. And i know two gender non-confirming lesbians who’ve been quite rudely challenged when using the women’s toilets at work, by women who thought they were biologically male - to be fair, I don’t know if those women held GC views, but I get the impression that those with GC views are more likely to challenge people using what they believe to be the “wrong” toilets on the basis of how they look.

@aseriesofstillimages why on earth would lesbians feel intimated by those expressing gc views?

I’m very well aware of the relatively small number of civil servants who are vehemently GC in their views - it’s just that I’ve only met one in my organisation who I know to be LG or B

I don’t know where you got the idea I go around intimidating lesbians. The lesbians I know feel far more intimidated by those expressing uncompromising GC views.

Yes, I hope no one would harass or discriminate against anyone for their beliefs. The difficulty sometimes though is drawing the line between that and appropriately challenging individuals if they choose to express views in a work context which may amount to harassment of others.

As I said, I don’t think many people were that interested in who the new chair would be - that doesn’t mean they don’t care about LGBT inclusion. It’s worth noting that most individuals didn’t have a chance to vote - it was up to each departmental network to organise a poll of its members or committee, and half of them just didn’t get around to it - probably because of work pressures.

I’ve discussed these issues with a few colleagues, and there are a range of views - most of us understand there are a number of really complex and difficult issues to which there are no easy answers. But the people I have spoken to who are furthest towards the GC end of the spectrum are all - apart from one - not LG or B (as far as I know).

I expect that they also know that believing sex matters in life and law is a protected beleif and people can't be discriminated against for this too?

I'm still a bit skeptical about the emphatically not though when so few bothered to vote and only 250 or so out of half a million voted for the two that are now the joint chairs. Seems underwhelmingly passive about it rather than emphatic.

Maybe nobody puts another perspective to you because you are so emphatically on the other side and as pp have said, this has a chilling effect. So you could quite easily be imagining this emphatic position held by others.

The voting certainly indicates that.

Well then you've nothing to worry about have you? You can happily carry on intimidating lesbians who don’t want to have sex with men with the full backing of the civil service

I don’t know why you spend so much time here telling off women when you’re so sure nothing is happening, no one is GC & you’re completely in the right

It’s true that most people weren’t that interested in the election of the new chair, but it is still the case that the vast majority of those involved in departmental LGBT+ networks (who are the majority of LGBT civil servants) are emphatically not “gender critical”

Ah I see. Well as this data shows less than half the Departments even took part in the election for an LGBT chair which is a massive amount of disinterest and the actual voting was from 800 people out of half a million so really, that's homeopathic proportions of relevance and should be treated accordingly.

The head of a:gender (the cross government trans and intersex network) is intersex herself and my understanding is she’s happy for the “I” to be included with LGBT (as long as the movement actually advocates for the particular and distinct needs of intersex people). Although I appreciate some other people with DSDs/intersex variations feel differently.

I got a copy through the cross-government gender network. So you might be able to sign up to their mailing list or contact your department’s networks to be involved. It can’t be shared outside the civil service so I can’t post a link.

Aargh my lot go on and on about intersex belonging to the LGBT+, I'm sure if I had a chromosomal disorder I'd be spitting feathers being co-opted in this way. They are so ignorant, but the groupthink is very strong and it is difficult to speak out. I daren't actually wear my SEEN lanyard as so many people wear the Proud Trust one, the one with rainbow stripes on one side and blue and pink stripes on the other. The Proud Trust who made the dice game for schoolchildren 😡

Hepwo · Yesterday 14:46

I'm sorry to hear that sinnerboy. It's disconcerting that the public sector dog can be wagged by this tiny tail.

I'm not in the public sector, I'm simply saying what I've learned from blogs, news reports, posts on MN...

How would you go about getting a copy?

Has anyone else seen the updated draft civil service policy on “gender identity and intersex”? I received this from the CGGN today and they are asking for feedback. I would encourage other civil servants to respond.

All of the above is very pertinent regarding numbers etc. however it is unwise to ignore the chilling effect this has on staff who are not in the trendy GI LGBTetc gang (possibly greater numbers?) and who have felt unable to speak out on their own views for several years.
only recently, and thanks to the recent successful legal challenges has it been possible to create SEEN or demur on groupthink such as pronouns in signatures etc.
Seeing ideologues rise into any kind of overarching position is uncomfortable at best, worrying otherwise.
The tacit endorsement of his views, despite working in CS, implies we are captured and not impartial. It’s an insult to ordinary CS and indeed union members

I'm sorry to hear that sinnerboy. It's disconcerting that the public sector dog can be wagged by this tiny tail.

Knowing how few of them there is puts it into perspective.

Hepwo · Today 08:57

Sure and as they have very kindly published the numbers to evidence that it can be pointed every single time.

There are only 250 or so people in the civil service that believe this nazi far right guff according to voting patterns so it's a miniscule position to take and disseminate as fact.

Unfortunately, we've seen that their deluded ranting has influence far out of proportion to their tiny numbers. People are still scared to call out their lies.

as they have very kindly published the numbers to evidence that it can be pointed every single time.

Which is good, I agree. But that's always going to be challenge after the fact. Their influence - baseless as it may be be - gets in first.

Like our recent staff survey that completely left out 'sex' as a category in the EDI part (had 2 questions on gender identity, though - a max.of 1 for each of the other protected characteristics). So that's a whole year's data that cannot be disaggregated by sex, despite the EDI plan specifically stating that they know about and want to address the underrepresentation of women at higher grades. Of course that can be challenged, and it may be fixed next year, but this year's data is permanently shot.

(HR's excuse was that they asked the LGBTQ+ network, who thought the questions were fine. They didnt ask the women's network - because we didn't have one.)

Sure and as they have very kindly published the numbers to evidence that it can be pointed every single time.

There are only 250 or so people in the civil service that believe this nazi far right guff according to voting patterns so it's a miniscule position to take and disseminate as fact.

This is very useful data I would suggest.

I do get what you’re saying Hepwo but the LGBT+ Network would be seen as one of the key diversity networks to consult on equality-related issues. We both know that the overreach of the GI movement far, far outweighs the numbers it actually represents.