This is just vile NHS again

But if you believe in gender ideology then you would be giving up women’s right to single sex spaces wouldn’t you?

I agree that being a trans woman has no impact on male violence patterns as they’re still a man. Hence why it’s important to keep them out of women only spaces.

No, that does not correlate. You could be neutral or believe in gender ideology and still feel unsafe in a mixed sex space. Women are conditioned to be wary of male-type bodies in spaces where they are alone. And this is perfectly understandable - and being trans has no effect upon male violence patterns.

Thank you! They asked for comments on a new policy and I just couldn't not speak.

I replied to their initial brush off letter but they haven't responded. They told me everyone on their focus group thought the language was OK- I said that suggests a lack of diversity in your focus group then!

Well done! You are speaking for many and I know it isn't easy 👏 I hope you are listened to and that speaking the truth doesn't negatively impact you.

I’m just going to say it … I’ve stopped caring about anyone’s sexuality, who or what they identify as, etc, etc. I’ve got my fingers stuffed firmly in my ears and I shall keep them there until everyone shuts the eff up.

Oh, and men, aka small gamete producers, eff off out of women’s lavs.

I remember the case, when the brave woman finally managed to make her voice heard after something like a year.

Bad enough that the hospital enabled a crime like that. But covering it up and gaslighting the poor woman whose assault they enabled is beyond disgusting. No one was penalised, as far as I remember.

The fact that an NHS trust deliberately allowed a transwoman onto a "female only ward" and he then went on to rape a highly vulnerable patient and the NHS COVERED THIS UP to protect HIM speaks volumes. And NO lessons "have been learned", they continue to allow this, and they don't give a shit about female safety, only male feelings.

This.

Because there are men who get sexual pleasure from listening to women urinating or just from making them uncomfortable by invading their space.

Also, toilets are often in places where a man can block a woman’s exit. And research has shown that far more sexual assaults are carried out in mixed-sex facilities than in women’s single-sex spaces.

But you know that.

I really applaud your attitude, you're right, silence doesn't help. It's all a bit like the Emperors new clothes.

Given that the punishment for dissent can be so harsh in the current climate, I do get why people feel they just can't speak up. It's not right in a democracy that people feel they can't express their legally held beliefs, but here we are. It's institutional gaslighting, people are trained to think that if they disagree, they must be awful people.

At least the tide is turning, thanks to Maya and others 💐

(As an aside, I work in the NHS and recently challenged HR on the use of c1s is their policies. If any of this other sexist sh1t comes near me, I will challenge that too. I do feel like the lone voice in a sea of rainbow lanyards.

HR said c1s was widely understood. I told them it was othering and sexist: I don't identify with my sex, I just am that sex, and that I object to other people being allowed to define me as something I don't choose for myself - seems a little one sided! Still waiting for a response. My eyes will fall out if they roll any further).

It's got to be the right kind of diverse, mind.

They generally don't seem to be interested in old people, poor people or women. Not cool / sexy enough.

The way the word diversity is used now is completely bizarre. It seems every corporate, government, charitable group, uses it in every context where they want you to think something is good.

My workplace is doing a project where they are working with architects on a major renovation, I didn't count how many times the word "diverse" appeared in their proposal, but it was a lot. Some places it really was an irrelevancy, in others they could have said, Different". As in, this space is used frequently by groups with different needs, and we've designed it to accommodate that. But instead it's "diverse people' who are, of course, vibrant.

It never seems to occur to them that diversity isn't always inherently good, it can often be a neutral value, and some times might be bad.

I do appreciate that. I still find it frustrating though, because I wont keep quite about things I strongly disagree with, so I struggle to understand that mindset. I also can't believe people don't have colleagues, who they are friendly enough with to ask "What do you think of this madness?" And then it spreads from there. I still think the majority of people are against these changes. All it takes is a bit of bravery to find the others who feel the same and then you have a movement within the organisation. Silence doesn't help anybody.

It's not that simple. If you work in a captured organisation, you risk bullying and damage to your career for taking a stand, even though you would be legally in the right.

The law protects your right to strike and you would have the backing of your union. All the bloody public sector unions are captured.

I applaud people who take a stand but we shouldn't decry those who don't feel they can. I mean, look what happened to JKR.

It's staggering that, after all the negative reportage and losses they've had, of late, all the big organisations giving them the cold shoulder, that they are still being used by the NHS.

As they have willingly and knowingly misrepresented the law, in order to further their agenda, I wonder why they haven't been banned from being involved with any official organisation.

I agree with a PP who said ‘sex realist’ was a better term than ‘gender critical’, but Helen Joyce and the Sex Matters team are very intelligently strategic and include very clear thinking and sharp lawyers. They are leveraging Maya’s victory and working within the law of the EA together with the art of the possible. Appalling that going to battle against discrimination against a protected belief might be more effective than fighting discrimination against women as a sex, but that seems to be where we are just now.

This.

The staff are just as bad for accepting this. All of them. They will strike for better pay (which I'm absolutely fine about) But they are too scared to lobby their unions or refuse to accept these policies? They need to grow a backbone and stop this shit from being implemented in the first place! I'm baffled by people who are such wetwipes! Speak up!!!

Yes but the 'sex' but in the 2010 Act was in place of the 1970s Sex Discrimination Act where it definitely only meant biological sex. So in the absence of a changed definition for the protected characteristic of sex in the 2010 act, I think it is clear that biological sex was meant. We now need clarification because of bad faith actors and captured judges, officials and politicians.

So a service that requires immediate important information on the patient and symptoms has to play the pronouns game! And when the wrong sex/ gender box gets ticked and sends the computer down the wrong path will the NHS also be forced to then pay out for killing uncle Trevor with his heart attack because uncle Trevor said he was she/her and called Tamsin and therefore skewed the data?

(Note: i have no idea if the fact that someone is male it female makes a difference in heart attacks, it is just an example illness)