Australia: Seven police interviewed, station raided over ‘false’ non-binary claims

It's an education in where women stand in the Victorian government's scheme of things. Rapists in women's prisons? No biggie. A few police officers playing the system to get a bigger clothing allowance? FULL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION!

Most officers will be in uniform so they won't get the allowance anyway from what I understand. Then there will be civilian support staff who probably won't get it. The figure is likely to be much less then 14.3m but still a significant figure.

I don't know about Australia but I used to work in a police station (not an officer civilian support) and my husband spent part of his service in CID. Never heard of a grooming code, people just dressed appropriately depending on the job they were doing. Male and female officers did get tokens for dry cleaning. No requirements about manicures or particular hairstyles. Thinking back most of the female officers I worked with had long hair they wore in a bun but most of the men had short hair. Scarves wouldn't be worn, strangling hazard and men wore clip on ties for the same reason if they wore a tie. I don't think women had special handbags for work just used a handbag like most of us would for work and I can't imagine they expected work to pay for it. They tended to be in cars lots of the time and actually the coats they wore were quite similar typical car coats not long fitted ones.

Totally agree with @DaphneDeloresMoreheadRidesOn

My husband couldn't get away with any old things, he is tall, needed shirts he got from a special place in London as otherwise the cuffs were half way up his arm, couldn't get an off the peg suit as they weren't long enough. Should he have got an extra allowance for being tall?

If my maths is correct with 22,118 employees total, that is at least an extra payroll of 14.3m per annum (and policing is still a male dominated role)

Without suggesting these particular police officers were not "at it", (I believe that is the genderist-acceptable phrase pretending a gender identity you do not have, which as we all know never happens, except when it does), surely the more nonTRA/non trans people buy into genderwoo as "real" because it's what they learn in school, is backed by state and cultural institutions, the more many of those people will conclude they must be non binary?

In the real, nonwoo world, the state of not especially aligned to male or female stereotypes but with some parts of both pretty much describes all of us.

If the TRAs get what they (claim they) want, non binary will be the new normal. Extra clothes allowances for all!

If all men had to do to get an extra $1300 in pay is 'switch their role profile to gender diverse' as per the allegation, then I'm surprised there are any men identifying as men on the force at all.
I can think of few people who wouldn't take a pay increase if all they had to do was tick a box that said they didn't identify as a stereotype.

When you consider that even a woman’s t-shirt from Target or Big W now seems to have to be some kind of elastane or Lycra clingy number and doesn’t last as well as a men’s shirt you certainly understand why the women’s allowance was more. Considering how even the best deodorant stains and damages those t-shirts because they are tight, they wouldn’t last as long as the male equivalent of a cotton Bonds t-shirt.

Plus to allow for dry cleaning business skirts and dresses vs wash and wear slacks for men. Women’s clothes in Australia have always cost more. Even the basics let alone business wear.

I'm all for our Non Binary police force. If my work offered me 1300 dollabucks for being Non Binary I'm sure I can claim that too. I'm as Non Binary as it gets mate, I don't know exactly what that means, but nobody else does either so who can say I'm not?

If they want me to dress "as a woman" part of the time, then on Thursday and Friday I sit in my home office wearing leggings, hoodie and pink trainers, easy as mate.

Probably because women's clothes are more expensive but worse quality so wear out quicker, needing to be replaced more often, so women will spend on average more money on clothing.
Plus of course bras, a whole other expense men don't have it, its like how female conscripts in my country get an extra allowance for underwear, because its more expensive for women than men.

I don’t think short term rent anywhere on the beach in Melbourne is going to be cheap. But I agree with Difficult, there are places where that $1300 could be a couple or a few weeks rent.

I do question how they are going to question staff members though. How do they assess the truthfulness, do they ask to see the clothes the officers have supposedly purchased under the scheme? Do they ask to see non-binary documentation (not that that is much of an issue now with the new laws)? But wouldn’t having to have the documentation either be forcing NB people to out themselves formally or be considered a privacy issue?

Surely this goes against the ‘acceptance without exception’ mantra as well.

If these officers followed the correct process to make the claims, then the issue is with the process if they are making false claims. It is remarkable that some people in the LGBT+ groups are calling for this to be a criminal offense. They want it both ways don’t they? They want to be able demand people view them as their identity with no formalities to having that identity but then they demand gatekeeping at the same time.

And I remember when the court case went through to allow the first passport with an ‘x’. I remember listening to the news and thinking that this was not progress. That seems so long ago and now we have how many hours of resources tied up in this debacle?

Surely the police bosses are comitting a hate crime against those NB officers by suggesting they don't exist Or something

It looks like it's more than seven people in the state as a whole. From news.com.au:

"In its annual report last year, Victoria Police only had 32 employees who were so-called “self-described” as neither male nor female.
But workforce figures as of June 27 provided to news.com.au show that number had soared to 139 — 127 of whom are sworn officers. Victoria Police currently employs 22,118 people, 16,249 of whom are police."

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/victoria-police-looking-into-claims-officers-identifying-as-gender-neutral-for-extra-1300-allowance/news-story/ab85868602ca99251b4aff14ae55d5ff

@Codlingmoths short term rentals are notoriously more expensive than long term.

Frankston is not the nicest place to be.

3bed houses are asking $450+ at the moment. That will be new or returning to market stock and therefore slightly higher than what most renters are currently paying.

I’m not sure that’s true; there’s a huge range in Frankston now, and plenty of multimillion dollar homes there.

It looked like dh would be working there a year or so ago and I looked up rental apartments to take the kids and hang out on the beach for a week in the holidays, but was surprised how much it all cost, I’d have thought you could rent a flat outside of peak season for a week for under 1200 but not on the beach side you can’t.

Hey, $1300 will go a long way on Frankston. That is about three weeks rent.

And all you have to do is ‘self declare’? I’m surprised there are only 7 officers doing this, frankly.

If I were those men I’d just meet up and agree that we wear pink socks and women’s underwear now. There you go, gender visibly expressed. They’ve obviously got some chutzpah to claim it to start with so I expect they’d be up for that, and happy to loudly talk about how uncomfortable women’s undies are and it’s the patriarchy innit?? They don’t make these things for penises and non binary people!!

I don't know a single female detective (and I know a lot) that dresses like that. Most only wear really smart clothes to court. If you took a look round any CID office you won't find women dolled up. Most just wear a pair of trousers and a a top. Probably from Sainsbury's.
and there definitely isn't some "grooming code" about hairstyles, makeup and shoes. As long as it's not offensive or revealing you wear pretty much what you like. I'd bet it's not much different Down Under

I think it's tremendous work there from the Frankston Police.

It looks like the police at Frankston have combined the two great Australian traditions of rorting the system and taking the piss. And who can blame them?

I'm not exactly sure how employment laws are applied to the police, but surely, under current laws, they'd have a case for discrimination on the grounds of their gender identity? Potentially they could tie the system up in knots for a long time.

As pp have said, the monetary difference has likely been set because of the 'pink tax' around the cost of women's clothes compared to men's.

And there will also be, for plain clothes police, a grooming code regarding appropriate wear. For women in some professions this still can include styles of shoe, tights, styles of skirts, jackets and blouses, manicured hands/nails, smart hair and make-up, scarves, bloody handbags and fitted long coats.

Men can get away with suits, shirts and ties, any old shoes and a raincoat.

The whole female grooming expectation is part of the 'third shift' of women's work.

Non-binary probably means they need 2 sets of clothes, skirts, dresses, shirts, suits, blouses, mens shoes, ladies heels, etc etc

All madness. But I can't blame anyone for exploiting a gaping big hole that someone else has put in place

Think how much money the world could save if we can move on from court rooms, judges, juries and burdens of proof:

"Did you commit this crime?"
"No, I didn't - not guilty."
"Fab, that's that established then; sorry for your inconvenience."

Funnily enough, that sounds like every workplace inquiry into bullying and sexism that I've ever come across. 'Nothing proved'.

Why does declaring yourself 'non-binary' get you the women's allowance anyway.
Why would they assume a non binary only wants to wear women's clothing?

Women's clothes are usually more expensive. Apparently that's because women care more about clothes and are prepared to pay higher prices.

How can you tell someone isn’t? Or how can you tell someone they aren’t if they say they are?