Your comments for Penny Mordaunt

[gendercritter]

I just read on another thread that Justine is meeting with Penny Mordaunt soon.

In Justine's words: 'You should also know that I’m due to meet soon with Penny Mordaunt to discuss “any ideas you may have on the women and equalities agenda’' and I will of course reflect the strong opinion of many Mumsnetters wrt to this issue and ask her to do a webchat too.'

I thought this was worth highlighting so people can leave comments here for @justinemumsnet to mull over and raise with Penny. Perhaps, Justine, you could print them all off and hand them over to her when you see her.

Thank you.

Make 'gender presentation' a protected characteristic instead of the legal fiction of changing sex.
A recent poll shows the majority of people don't want to harm anyone, but don't believe people can change sex, and understand the need for single sex spaces and services.

The statement 'trans women are women' gives me no confidence in the statement 'women only services and spaces are protected under the Equality Act'.

This Govt is about to debate removing Housing Benefit from women in domestic violence shelters.
When Govt policies will lead to women being actively harmed as their rights are erased, why should women trust you to understand or tackle the issues we face?
Sex and sexual orientation are supposedly both protected characteristics, but lesbians are being subjected to harassment for theirs.

Sports
Prisons
Domestic Violence shelters
Rape Crisis
Womens Centres
Hospital Wards
Psychiatric Wards
Girl Guides
Dormitories - in children's homes, camps, universities, and hostels.
Showers and changing rooms

These are all separated by sex, for reasons that still exist. Create a third unisex space for people that want it.

I have absolutely no faith in Justine after her comments last night to accurately and honestly represent the GC views of her users to Penny Mordaunt.

Are the people making the assessment of the submissions to the consultation process trauma-informed and DV & coercive control trained? If not, why have they been appointed when they lack the key competencies to discern truth from fiction.

I'd feel a lot happier if Janice Turner were invited to contribute to and cover the meeting, if at all possible.

I'd feel a lot happier if Janice Turner were invited to contribute to and cover the meeting, if at all possible.

Now THAT is an excellent idea.

Relevent thread... including the 'so called feminists' comment:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2993425-Maria-Miller-interviewed-by-Janice-Turner-full-text

'Would Penny Mordant with Amber Rudd and Maria Miller (previous Women's & Equalities Ministers) like to join the signatories of the letter in The Morning Star (accepting this is likely not their preffered newspaper) in recognising the following?

"You may be aware that on April 13 this year, an activist, Tara Wood was convicted of the assault by beating of Maria MacLachlan, a 60-year-old woman who had gathered with others in order to attend a meeting at which they could discuss the potential impact on women and girls of such a change to the law.

On March 8, an incident also occurred on a Bectu picket line in which trans activists, with no connection to the industrial dispute itself, mobbed and verbally attacked a female trade union member on the basis of having recognised her as an attendee at a similar meeting.

And in late April women in Bristol looking to meet and discuss changes to the Gender Recognition Act were met with masked activists blocking entrances to the venue, and deliberately intimidating those wishing to go inside.

More recently, a meeting organised by Woman’s Place UK was targeted with a bomb threat which Hastings Police are investigating as a serious incident.

These cases are part of systematic attempts to shut down meetings organised by women at which they can discuss potential legislative changes and the impact these may have on any sex-based rights already enshrined in law.... (continues)

We are sure that, whatever your view regarding the issues around the Gender Recognition Act, you will agree that it is unacceptable for women to be made scared to engage in political life.

We, the undersigned, publicly and unequivocally condemn the use of violence or tactics of intimidation on this issue"

This should surely transcend party politics?

sorry, link:
morningstaronline.co.uk/article/improving-climate-debate-around-proposed-changes-gender-recognition-act

Good post BowlofBabelfish - those are questions to ask, as is the point about women who stay segregated for religious reasons. The women-only swim session is essential for many women from a variety of backgrounds if they want to swim at all, but it will be off-limits to many if self-IDing transmen are allowed in. (At least those who have not transitioned medically.)

The idea that men can become women just because they "identify as" women seems contrary to what would happen in any other situation of biological difference.

What would Penny say to someone who claimed to be of a different ethnic background to their biology, such as Rachel Dolezal, a blonde, blue-eyed caucasian woman who, as an adult, started to "identify as black"?

Does a tall person who decides to self-identify as a person of restricted growth actually become one, despite not having the achondroplasia gene?

Does a non-disabled person who "identifies as disabled" have the right to receive Personal Independence Payment?

Can we "identify as" being on holiday and therefore actually be on holiday, and lie on the beach instead of working?

If an adult "identifies as" a child, despite this clearly not being the case biologically, do they actually become one, and do all activities and facilities for children become available to them on that basis?

If a man self-identifies as a cat, despite not having all the usual "cat" genes or physical characteristics, can he enter everyone else's garden whenever he likes, and hiss at the neighbours?

Can a 70-year-old become 30 years younger because they self-identify as a 40-year-old?

Could a Mumsnet user identify as Penny Mordaunt, and therefore become Penny Mordaunt, and arrive at her workplace tomorrow to do her job?

I can't keep this short. I have five question topics for Penny:

Transwomen are not women unless you change the legal definition of women to include men which has been done in Scotland and seems to be underway in the rest of the U.K.

1. Given that women have no current descriptor then, are you going to propose a new word to replace the historical meaning of the word "women" and how will that be applied retroactively to history and science? Is there a government plan in place to record properly, by sex, socially relevant data which is currently being skewed by misinformation (male violence crime being reported as female due to self id for example). Wouldn't it be easier to keep the original meaning and create a new term for men who wish to be women (and vice versa)?

2. What guidance will be given to schools and other children's services to ensure children receive proper factual sex education throughout their childhood in order to protect them and give them the scientific knowledge of their own biology in the face of such overwhelming mixed rhetoric from social media and government policy?

3. What are your thoughts on the misappropriation of hard won disabled use toilets and spaces by gender neutral policy? Do you agree that the removal of facilities for the disabled for the benefit of the able bodied is wrong?

4. Why is it acceptable for trans rights to actively remove rights from and reference to women, children and the disabled sectors of society but not from men? Transmen cannot inherit title for example, cancer research uk removed all reference to women from female cancer information but not men from male cancer information. Why are trans rights not given in addition to everyone else's rights as opposed to by removal of everyone else's rights?

5. What ethical testing has been done on the proposed changes to children's gender welfare? Where is the research and which professionals were on the panel? Does the government have a plan to increase mental health support for those who suffer from dysmorphia who will no longer receive two years assistance from health professionals during gender transition? Is there a plan in place to provide increased mental health/social/police support for the women and children affected by this policy (women are being targeted by terrorists for meeting to discuss this legislation, children are being guided towards pharmaceutical puberty blocking)?

Why is it necessary to make the process of obtaining a GRC less onerous when the process to obtain PIP has been progressively made more difficult?

Is it that on the one hand it does not cost to have a GRC whereas PIP is directly impacting the government bills? Is money the only cost to be considered and any other personal impact on anyone to be ignored?

Why have been no impact assessments of the GRA on any other vulnerable group?

If trans women are women, this is a complete redefining of what woman means.

The meaning is biological sex , observed ( not assigned) at birth.

If the the government stance is that trans woman are women, it is impossible to have a debate.

Does Ms Mordant really see no difference between trans women and women. No difference no conflicting rights.

So woman is now a feeling, nothing to do with biology.

So if I defy identity as a man do I now get equal pay?

First off thanks to Justine for this. I was honestly beginning to lose hope in MN as it does really appear that the recent decisions have been basically..capitulating to MRAs. Which MN has a reputation for NOT doing, but this time its different for some reason.

I do appreciate the tightrope walk of moderating this issue (and many other issues, though none quite as difficult as trans stuff right now) however I do feel that some of the recent decisions have been very very bad. The allowing reports via twitter for one, and the recent changes to the guidelines secondly, along with the odd way the mods seem to be interpreting the new guidelines. The moderation has always been consistent on here, not at all now. We have had situations where one mod has openly said a comment is fine, then another mod has been along and deleted/warned the poster! Also since the new guidelines, we seem to have had an influx of trolls...who are here solely to poke and prod feminists and then report them. Which is clearly a bad thing.

Anyway, my main question would be basically, why does noone appear to understand the issues with this whole thing, with the exception of GC feminists, and a couple of journalists. Do people understand the issues but do not dare admit this for fear of transactivists and their behaviour (understandable, having been on the recieving end of horrific abuse from them myself) or are they really that blind to how it will all be abused, and literally not giving enough of a shit to think into the issues any deeper apart from parroting 'transwomen are women', which they clearly are not. Then when the protesting that statement started, I would ask for a definition of woman that includes transwomen and women, but excludes men. There is not one. Which proves the statement is absolute balls.

Also I would ask why the questions on the consultation page do not appear to udnerstand how things currently are. For example, on the part about mixed sex hostels and such, it is claimed such businesses can ask to see a GRC. This is simply untrue. Also why it seems people who should be 'in the know' about all of this and how it has a knock on effect on stuff like the EA..don't appear to understand that allowing any male to change his sex to female, erases all EA provisions anyway. Even the exemptions (that are weak, given the very fact that areas are sex segregated anyway does not appear to be 'a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim' ) cannot realistically be used in a lot of scenarios if the man has a birth certificate stating he was born female!

Finally I would ask why the government is claiming that the GRC process is clearly not working as not many trans people have GRCs. When when the GRA was drawn up, it was estimated that 5000 people would get one to help them. Just under 5000 people currently have one. So..how exactly is this clearly not working for the swelling 'transgender' population? It was for transsexual people, not those who are non-binary, feminine men etc. or just...MRAs

I hope she does come on for a webchat. We could get so many questions to her and if she does not already understand the issues then it may open her eyes a little to actually listen to the nasty feminists who wish to preserve the current rights of women and girls rather than giving them away to a bunch of narcissistic abusive MRAs (meaning 'transactivists', not trans people in general, who seem to be quite happy with a third unisex option being added whenever possible)

Why is it necessary to make the process of obtaining a GRC less onerous...

And why is the push for demedicalisation for adults happening alongside a push for medicalisation of children?

I quite like the question that Posie Parker used in her presentation in Bristol: "Does my 11 yo daughter have the right to get undressed in a changing room without seeing a penis?"

Ask her why the exemptions that allow sex segregation in the EA are being ignored out of fear, and whether the exemptions need to become mandatory in order to protect women and girls (actual women and girls, not the ones with penises).
And make sure she has actual, relevant figures about the number of ‘women’ who keep their male genitalia.
And discuss desistance, and the lack of rigorous medical control over the licensing and prescribing of drugs for children, and the medicalisation pathway to sterility. Ask why it’s ok to sterilize a teenager, and not a middle aged woman whose family is complete.

Am I, as a girl guide leader, going to be under legal remit to house a 14yo boy in a tent with girls and not tell their parents? And be accused of bigotry and hatred if I implement basic safeguarding methods?

Why does the NSPCC recommend separate bedrooms for teenagers of different sexes, but believe that teenaged boys who claim to be born in the wrong body are fine to shower, change, and sleep with teenage girls?

Helen Steel
"Why is the government promoting anti science nonsense that it is our parents who decide whether we are male or female?Our sex is determined by biology & recorded by medical professionals.Gender is what happens afterwards when society tries to make us conform to sexist stereotypes"

twitter.com/helensteel12/status/1014408578264961024

Since you have now decided not to alter the EqA, which the previous Maria Miller consultation had recommended, how do you propose to reverse the changes made by organisations in the hopes of "getting ahead of the law"?

For example, policies introduced by Girl Guides and YHA, along with many women's groups. Single sex exemptions in the EqA have already been decimated by Ms Miller's botched and highly partisan report and many women would like to see them reinstated.

What does the Government intend to do to achieve a more pro-woman, pro-safeguarding environment for the women and girls of the UK, given the damage Ms Miller has done to it?

Will there be an investigation into how so many Local Authorities came to have errors with their Equality & Diversity policies?

Also, might it be a good idea to ensure other public sector services and organisations are quoting and applying the Equalities Act correctly?

womansplaceuk.org/grassroots-womens-pressure-forces-local-authorities-to-comply-with-the-law-over-sex-and-gender/

Please ask Penny if it would be possible before any change/review/rewrite of any laws with regard to equalities, to define what is meant within those laws by the words Woman, Man, Sex, Gender and indeed, the words with regard to trans identity. If the words transexual and transgender are used, are they intended to mean the same thing, or something different? Words have meanings and we all need to be using the same dictionary otherwise, even if changes are made, we still wont know what is meant.

All of the above. Plus:

In view of the large body of academic research which identifies different patterns of behaviour/outcomes/need for people with the physiology or socialisation of a male/female (I am thinking particularly about healthcare, crime and education, there are probably more):

How will you ensure that data collection and analysis allows us to keep an eye on these trends and is not affected by an individual's right to 'self-define' their sex?

I've no problem with analysing data according to self-defined gender identity as well, but data about healthcare outcomes, about criminality, about poverty, about educational outcomes MUST continue to be categorisable by the factors which have been shown, over many years, to have an impact.

If this data collection and analysis is not protected, it will seriously compromise our ability to make evidence-based policy in future, to protect any group (women or trans) who need it.

If you stated in a pre election manifesto an intent to remove all sex segregation for women, the right to female only health care professionals for women, and that the government would be anti science and proposing to punish people for blasphemy against the new anti science beliefs do you think you would have won an election?

Considering the truly massive impact this will have on 51% of the population, do you think it might not have been far more ethical and responsible to have put this in a manifesto before launching it?

Although I hold out no hope whatsoever of PM being asked anything remotely challenging or reality based, or having anything but a highly politically correct cosy chat about biscuits.