Physiotherapy SEEN

[VenusEnvyXX]

I am concerned about the CSP's position statement on transphobia and want to explore whether members think the CSP would benefit from having it's own SEEN.

If you're not familiar with SEENs, they are a balance to the LGBTQIA+ groups, can be formally recognised and eligible for funding on an equal footing as other network groups. They exist in civil service, journalism, police, HR, city, and the NHS one is nearly ready to launch.

I do not agree with Rob Yeldham, and previously, Karen Middleton, when they say that physiotherapy has a transphobia issue. If there is evidence of this I have not seen it.

I have been contacted by a number of CSP staff and members, who share my concerns that this announcement misrepresents the law, defames members and manages to be both unnecessary and unclear.

It seems that people who are diametrically opposed to the view that sex is real and immutable are employed by and in positions of power and influence at our trade union. This is absolutely fine, it is important for a trade union to reflect its membership. I am uncomfortable with the views of activists forming policy without due process and debate. I hope to be wrong, but I suspect that might have happened in the formation of this CSP position statement.

It is difficult to speak up about these issues, people are scared of being accused of transphobia, and rightly so, the personal penalties can be high.

If you would be willing to share your views or insights with me anonymously here then I'd be grateful. Alternatively, (and if you are willing to trust that I am who I say I am!):
email - [email protected]
substack - @venusenvyxx
twitter - @gussiegrips

I am proud to have had a long career in physio and it seems to me that this is little more than a training and communication issue, which, like sex, is not complicated.

bests
Elaine Miller

Just returned to iCSP - Unbelievable.

Hello, I just want to say that I work in a totally unrelated (although similarly captured) profession but I am the mum of a regular user of NHS paediatric physio services and I completely support you in this.

Also whenever I see your name on social media it reminds me to do some pf exercises so double thanks for that ;)

iCSP- suspect that one of the more interesting posters has gone and pressed the disagree button for all Gender crucial posts. They were not there earlier on. Some of which really do not warrant a disagree. Gone and ticked all the agree buttons for reasonable posts.

I got an email from the CSP Digital Team telling my why my post had been removed from the iCSP discussion-due to me saying that people who describe themselves as transwomen are men.
They told me that this goes against the statement against transphobia because it is denying trans people’s gender identity, and that it is possible to have this discussion without hurting the feelings of trans members.
This is my reply to them…what do we think I’ll get back? 🤔

Dear Digital Team,
I obviously would not post anything I thought was transphobic and I don't agree that this statement denies the gender identity of trans people. In fact it affirms the fact that there are people who identify as transwomen; the bit about them being men is about their sex, not their gender identity.
Please let me know what rewording would be acceptable to the CSP and still maintain the meaning of the post?
Many thanks
Best wishes

The whole ideology is built upon shifting sand and therefore nothing makes deep sense, where you can really feel safe in the knowledge ‘yep, I get it - understood’.
It is a shame in a community of people made up entirely of those who have BScs and MScs that we have to deny facts.

Rob chose the website for that article so he should be able to argue his points there and not hide.

its embarrassing.

“No, I'm not. I'm not talking about a lone woman choosing not to treat male patients, I'm talking about a lone woman choosing not to treat a patient who is also a woman.”

One of the new comments on ICSP…

I think it was Helen Joyce who said “well we can’t have a conversation on this then because we can’t agree on the basic terms!”

This comment sums this up, how is it possible to have an honest debate with someone so far intrenched in this ideology!

Agreed- what a post…. clearly one of rhe TWAW variety.

Whoever that new commenter is, he (for I am sure it’s a he) is one pompous and patronising prick.

Maybe it’s one of the authors of the potion statement. The comments are not going well for this, are they?

iCSP has continued overnight , thank you Elaine for having the bravery to put your name on the forum. This thread has been signposted so hopefully some can come here for free discussions.

I'm here and on the icsp thread. Just appalled by the shut down and censorship of any constructive debate being labelled as transphobia. It felt as if this was released to coincide with the Cass report. I mean WTAF? What does my Union stand for? Censorship and trans activism? As a pp said I want my union to provide practical guidance for treating transgender patients.

Rob has just posted something about his understanding of the Equality act (implying that GRC trumps sex).
Words such as ‘ unlikely’ ‘ it will not normally’ are unhelpful. No examples given..

This is the post-

Several contributions have asked about refusing to treat trans women. Under the Equality Act 2010 there are some grounds for providing women only services. However:

• It is unlikely to be lawful to exclude trans women from these services if they have legally changed their sex by obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.
• While there are some limited exceptions, it will not normally be lawful to discriminate against someone based on the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. As soon as someone is clear in their intention to permanently change the gender in which they live, they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

I'm a women's health physio - yes I still use that term, because I treat women. Women experiencing issues due to pregnancy and post birth, a result of their sex and biology. They aren't pregnant people, birthing parents, uterus owners, they are women. I am surrounded by birth workers who are do not see the harm in the mangling of language to suit the trans agenda.

I started picking up on this nonsense several years ago through the feminist pages on Mumsnet and have watched as these ideas have become mainstream and been horrified by the capture of our organisations and the lack of resistance. The CSP does not currently represent me.

Rob clearly has no idea about the equality act!
I also want to ask him how one “lives as the opposite gender!” That question cannot be answered without resorting to gender stereotypes!

"As soon as someone is clear in their intention to permanently change the gender in which they live, they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment." I think this is the part that continually perplexes me as the majority of transwomen will never medically transition and will still have male genitalia. Seeing as the NHS currently already fail in their duty to keep female patients safe from sexual assault, particularly within mental health settings, I honestly don't know how to reconcile duty of care to vulnerable female patients with the policy of allowing male-bodied people to share women only spaces solely on the basis of a persons "intent" to transition. If I had confidence that the NHS would endeavour to make separate "third" spaces available it wouldn't be as much as an issue but after the debacle of a trust denying a woman had been raped because there only "women" on the ward, I have no such confidence. "The House of Lords heard that Annex B, an NHS policy allowing patients to be sent to single-sex wards that alight with their gender preference and if any woman raises concern then they are to be told that there is no man on the ward." We are being asked to potentially compromise patient safety by being unable to raise safety issues around a persons gender identity.

Is Mr Anonymous now saying that women’s health physios need to learn how to examine male genitalia? He has to be a troll.

I just read his ( sure it is a he) response and just spat my tea out.
The word salad is lacking any substance and the lack of thought into womens health physiotherapists is astounding.

I work in an area with a higher population of trans-identified people. The lack of critical thinking and the blind acceptance of these statements and policies is shocking.

I have concerns around how much this affects people who do not speak English as a first language and don't understand terms such as 'uterus-haver'. This clearly impacts access to care and health literacy of an under-served population.

I have concerns about patients and staff who come from other cultures where trans issues are not so prevalent and so can easily find themselves in difficulty simply by using correct factual terms around men and women.

I have concerns about the lack of records of sex and gender identity and how that impacts clinical reasoning. Where I work, only sex is recorded and so if a person changes gender identity, their sex is changed on the record.

This is really disappointing from the CSP.

Definitely a he. No woman is that patronising. Well, maybe only a certain kind of “woman”!

The question I am really asking is

• is the CSP going to reflect on any of this the responses, the iCSP discussions, the points raised, implications and maybe evaluate the best way to move forward on this ? Or are they going to continue forward regardless ? Are they going to stop and think the pending guidance may need considerably more and wider research/ questioning/ less of an activist take? This not the only issue with concerns me… so not holding my breath.

Namechanged—I've been on MN for a long time, on the previous thread and also the current icsp thread..... where I'm at:
I had come to peace (to a degree) with the issue because I had to, and I also felt that there had been some progress in the areas most important to me—children, sports, and prisons. I'm not suggesting that things have gone away, but the whole issue has become stressful, and so I have backed off avoided X/Twitter and the feminist sections of MN.

I am in an area of the country where if you have a middle-class teen or young adult, you will know tens of trans-identifying young people. I would estimate that this was around 20% of the school year in my middle child's year group.

One of my children is in a relationship with a trans-identifying person who is lovely and kind and treats my child well and they love each other.

One very good friend with a trans-identifying very young adult has undergone surgical intervention and navigating this in real life with people I respect and care about has been hard, and although there have been some tough moments, we have navigated through it and remain good friends.

I treat this as a religious movement and a belief, and so I respect the choice of pronouns in a personal setting.

I'm not sure why I'm saying all this - perhaps it's because I don't think I'm horrendously bigoted, or perhaps it's because I still think that I am grounded in reality and think that sex is important. Perhaps it is justification because the whole issue makes me anxious, and I'm trying to calm myself down.

But fuck me; the CSP statement has given me massive rage ... what the actual hell. The optics CSP???? read the fucking room - the Cass report is so important, and the CSP has just left it, along with multiple issues just hanging in the air. They are so blinkered and regurgitating inane nonsense from 4 years ago. And women's health physios need retraining????

I don't want to be cross and press refresh on MN every 2 hours, trawling through Twitter to see if someone (other than Elaine) has said anything worthwhile.

Slave2Avocads I feel you!
Could have written a lot of what you’ve said myself. I keep telling myself to stop going on iCSP (particularly to reply to Mr Anon!!) but I’m so cross that the CSP has been so rubbish that I can’t seem to leave it!
Refreshing in solidarity with you 😊

It's quite something, that thread. I've bought indigestion tablets after reading it this morning.

There is a webinar tonight on standing for council. It's in 45 mins, 6pm.

Here is the link. I asked for it and was told they are not recording who is going to attend, it is anonymous - and as it is not linked to your membership number I think that if you are careful with your name and keep your camera off you can, indeed, be anonymous. This is what I was sent:

"After we have forwarded the link to you, as below, your email will be deleted, we are not retaining who attends this session.

Elections webinar details:

The CSP Governance Team are hosting an informal webinar session for members interested in finding out more about what it is like to sit on CSP Council.

This will be an informal session, hosted by the Head of Governance, for members to find out what is involved in sitting on CSP Council and ask questions about the role and / or the elections process.

Webinar participants are anonymous to each other and can post questions anonymously throughout the session.

The webinar will take place on Wednesday 17 April at 6pm, the link to join the webinar is below.

https://csp-org-uk.zoom.us/j/93957308082

If you have any further questions, please contact [email protected]

I'm sharing here because there's not time for you all to get your own link.

I'm going to stand. it's easier to change things from inside than out and I have 30 years of being a proud member of the CSP so it's probably reasonable to give something back.

If we had a few people with critical thinking and common sense on the council it would definitely help reduce this sort of nonsense.