“Why aren’t you getting changed”. Man asks female Darlington nurse this 3 times in female changeroom

This article filled me with sadness and fury. The word is inevitable: it's dystopian. It's state sanctioned, misogynistic abuse and it's systemic, deliberate, and probably strategised. I agree with the poster upthread who suggested that these bullish, captured institutions will push back against the SC ruling with all they are worth. Sadly, the only way to bring them into line will be to suing these organisations for failure to comply with EHRC guidlines. There will likely be a succession of gruelling court cases, which women will win, but in a pyrrhic victory. We're all familiar with the phrase 'the process is the punishment'. And, as of now, poor Karen is still being put through this avalanche of shit and having to confront the same male abuse that has followed her throughout her life. My heart breaks for her.

Who the FUCK asks someone, three times, why they are not getting changed? The question of 'how does that affect you' is unanswerable, but the reason hardly needs explanation. Rose gets off on trying to force female compliance. If it's against their will, so much the better. 'Rose' is a pervert. Exposure, or 'flashing' to give it it's accurate name, is a known precursor to more serious sexual offending. It's a ciminal offence. It's now worse than de-facto legal - it's positively encouraged, and women are the ones who will be punished if they dare to object.

Male sexual predilections are to be protected at all costs and woe betide any women who refuses their consent. Women's place is to fall into line or else be banished to the colonies (cancellation and made unemployable). In 2025 UK.

Under His Eye.

The 26 in the article refers to the number of women who signed a letter of complaint about sharing changing facilities with a man. I didn't read anything about there being 26 trans people in the Darlington hospital

Although even one man trampling over women's boundaries is too many

From @KnottyAuty 's post at 08.16

It came from the top and probably pre dates the GRA. The NHS has been lobbied for at least 20 years but the TRA ramping up really got going maybe 15 years ago; the thought police really stamping out dissent (conflating sex and gender wholescale) for about 10 years. Everyone has been on diversity training which has embedded the “right think”

That's a hell of an effort just to include whatever tiny percentage of the population it was back then, before more people were groomed into transing in the ensuing years.

Can you imagine where we'd be if the likes of Stonewall had turned their attention to, say, disability needs after they'd become redundant on gay issues. No, that would never have done, it had to be a particular kind of diversity.

I think @KnottyAuty interpreted the “26 in one workplace alone” as meaning there are 26 TiMs in one NHS workplace. As we’re auditing the NHS trans policies, I’m sure she wanted to know which trust that was so that we could pay closer attention to it.

The pp above was, I think, referring to the women affected by the NHS policies - so, yes, in Darlington. So, a misinterpretation on @KnottyAuty’s part maybe - but maybe an overreaction on yours? We’re all on the same side here.

My choice was to agree (and be performance managed on) unachievable targets dreamed up by external consultants or leave. When I attempted to show, with data, why the targets could not be delivered, I was told off for being negative.

The unworkable ideas of wet behind the ears Management Consultants has bedevilled the public sector for a good few decades. Why should an Executive Officer with 20 years experience be listened to, when a 25 year old Management Consultant doesn't agree?

bloody hell, @KnottyAuty the information is in the very first post. Darlington.

Where is this please?

I’m a clinician turned manager who left the NHS over a different issue, but for what it is worth, the managers actually can’t win either. I left because I was faced with having to implement impossible targets after the Lansley reforms. My choice was to agree (and be performance managed on) unachievable targets dreamed up by external consultants or leave. When I attempted to show, with data, why the targets could not be delivered, I was told off for being negative. I’m certain that there will be managers who have tried to challenge gender ideology and who will have been put back in the box, or who like me, have quietly left. That the NMC, RCN, CQC along with dozens of other organisations are captured, means there is no support for dissenters.

What I do think however, is that a lot of quiet resisters are still in place. If the right guidance and leadership is introduced those resisters will be in a better place to hold the line.

Are there any other areas where employers decide to just not follow health and safety rules and the law and get away with it? Are there oil rigs where they don't bother with safety gear because some people don't like it? In operating theatres do they not follow hygiene rules because they seem so complicated?

I think not

Archive of DM for those who don’t want the cookies.

https://archive.ph/qqvfK

I shouldn’t be but I am shocked at the number of temporising comments about waiting for ‘further guidance’. Yet again, where was this due diligence when bringing in all of these policies that so harmed women? Where were the equality impact assessments?

I’m pleased that there are memos and internal documents. On the flip side, what does this tell us about the culture of impunity and immunity in which these epistemic lanyard classes are operating?

I would like an economist to do one those impact assessments. We have economic data on the costs of assisted dying. Can we have economic assessment of the population impact costs for women? It’s known as the net monetary benefit of an intervention.

One SINGLE workplace.

@BigHeadBertha

Hardly any women affected by these pervs, you say? At least 26 in one workplace alone.

It came from the top and probably pre dates the GRA. The NHS has been lobbied for at least 20 years but the TRA ramping up really got going maybe 15 years ago; the thought police really stamping out dissent (conflating sex and gender wholescale) for about 10 years. Everyone has been on diversity training which has embedded the “right think” so I doubt you’d get much sense out of any manager you came across. The NHS is full of all sorts of rules which clash and don’t make sense. Staff have to do the best they can. So I got the impression that Stonewall law was accepted (or maybe just tolerated) as the cultural norm and maybe it was assumed that everyone in other sectors were being told similar. I think it’s becoming very clear that large sections of the population are completely unaware that the NHS Staff have been told to lie to them or make nurses change in front of male colleagues for fear of losing their jobs. On the Sandie Peggie thread we heard of some training modules where staff couldn’t pass mandatory CPD unless they selected the “correct” multiple choice option. Someone aptly labelled it the “gaslight granny” training… Read the section of Tribunal Tweets for Sandie Peggie’s hearing - the manager Esther is clearly terrified to admit that sex is real and relevant to nursing… scary stuff

Good for KJK.

Im not one of these managers but I work with a lot of them and have been thinking the same thing.

I think some of it is just sheer volume of work. It’s utterly relentless in the NHS and has been for at least the last 6 years. I don’t think they can face the battle with the TRA because they’re so aggressive & immediately go on the attack. Far easier to just say yes. Some of it is just not thinking too deeply about it as has been demonstrated numerous times on MN where people focus on the “but it’s such a small number” and ignore the fact that redefining women to include men affects 51% of the population plus I expect given the age range of most NHS senior managers they may well have children caught up in it

im only guessing because I’m not an NHS manager but I can’t believe many of them are true believers

Because they all complain that they don't want this topic to be discussed anywhere but in the naughty corner. It is almost as if they don't care about the rights and safety of women and children.

I think the CEOs are on a circuit - many ckme
frkm a charity sector background. The rot set in their a long time ago

Thank you for sharing that article: KJK putting it in blunt, absolutely accurate terms again:

'This is what happens when you get a group of people who think that they are doing the work of the greater good. It's like we don't matter to these people. They just couldn't give a toss about women and women's rights. When it comes to a [belief system] that's not based in reality, there's no place these people won't go to defend it. I hope they get sued to smithereens. You have to punish them with the full force of the law. You have got to make people pay. It's absolutely shameful.

Can you imagine being in that room saying, ''We are going to go against the Supreme Court?" It's a very quick descent into chaos. The Supreme Court has to be the final word on this. The council leaders have been brainwashed for a very long time. They are not the academic elite. These institutions play with public money. They don't face the consequences of their actions, they just waste money. They are still managing to centre the conversation around men.'

That. In a conversation about women all anyone can talk about in public services and largely in government, is men.

Point proved.

I was thinking exactly the same last night.

i’m saddened that only GB news and the DM seem to have picked Karen’s story up, it goes to show how fucked up it all is and how blinkered people have become about the situation in the spirit of #bekind

I’m sick to death of it all

I'm interested in this. The Mail published photos yesterday of numerous chief executives etc who have anti women / pro pervy men policies in their hospitals / police forces etc. An attempt (generated by Kellie Jay Keen from what I read) to expose those at the top who're signing off on all this.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14654673/NHS-trusts-local-councils-DEFYING-Supreme-Court-transgender.html

Agree. Men need to stop.

Curious here,just who ARE the NHS management who are enforcing this behaviour? There’s clearly LOADS of them at many many NHS Trusts. They must blend with gen pop,go about their lives & jobs as any of us do. Do ANY of them read Mumsnet? Law of averages ,some must do,so come on,if you’re NHS management who has enforced ANY of these policies,come on here and explain yourself. If you’re SO sure you’re right tell us why,so we can understand where you’re coming from. I’m genuinely interested to know the thinking behind these decisions

So accurate. They’re a bunch of wet, disingenuous and gullible liars and I have no respect for them or anything they say, and here I am referring to the “benevolent flying monkeys” and not the malevolent ones, of which there are many.

They identify as not racist despite saying obviously racist things.

Do they decry racism? They like to say that if black women can use women's facilities, men should be allowed to as well because apparently there's no significant difference. And they like to exploit and trivialise race equality by claiming that single sex spaces are no different to racial segregation. That's all pretty racist.