Jess Bradley - a government advisor on women's rights suspended by NUS over indecent blog. Part iii

[MipMipMip]

There doesnt seem to be another part 3 coming up si here goes.

R0wantrees thanks for that article. It's a good reminder, for me, of a time before I'd looked down the rabbit hole, when I'd read an article like that and feel nothing by sympathy, when I saw no reason to doubt the integrity or motivations of organisations advocating trans rights.

It's particularly useful to me as I'm in conversation with a brocialist family friend who's fairly influential in some activist circles, who just couldn't understand where I was coming from when I tried to discuss trans issues with him recently. This article is a good reminder of where his head is at, and will (hopefully) help me in my mission of getting through to him!

How is Stephen Whittle open and unbiased given he is " an activist with the transgender activist group Press for Change"

Does that signify "open and unbiased"

Well, in a word, no.

Is there any mechanism for complaining about this?

@Huttoneer welcome to Mumsnet too! :)

If I recall correctly, Stonewall didn't include trans at all until Ruth Hunt took over, and it was one of her main priorities.

The relationship between Stonewall/PinkNews/TRAs is quite interesting.
The outgoing CEO of Stonewall was Ben Summerskill, who was heavily criticized by PinkNews. He left in 2014 and was replaced by Ruth Hunt. The main conflict was over views on gay marriage, according to Wikipedia...
Since then, PinkNews and Stonewall have become friendly, and wholeheartedly embraced the trans agenda.

That is genuinely scary holy war extremist rhetoric. I hope screenshots exist, because those lines will not look cute some way down the line.

Incredible research done by everyone, btw!

Sorry, that was in response to the screenshot of Ada Cable’s blog. It ended up out of context.

"See TELI Co-founder Tara Hewitt's report for UHSM which records data on 'gender' and 'trans' as 'protected characteristics':"

Gender and trans are NOT protected characteristics under the EA2010
Gender reassignment is.
As is sex.

It seems inconceivable that Tara Hewitt was not aware of the 9 protected characteristics of the 2010 Equalities Act.

Tara Hewitt : Liverpool University Law 2005 – 2011
CV remote.com/tarahewitt

'UHSM employee recognised in national awards'
"Tara Hewitt, the new Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Lead at the University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust (UHSM), has been shortlisted for the National Excellence in Diversity Awards.

Out of thousands of nominees, Tara has been shortlisted in the Diversity Champion within the Public Sector Category for her work as a NHS Equality & Diversity Lead, Freelance Diversity Consultant working across NHS organisations in the UK.

Tara has been recognised for her role in organising the largest ever NHS-led Trans Equality Conferences in Stockport and Wigan, for conducting training sessions on Trans Equality for over 350 NHS employees across Greater Manchester and for her work tackling hate-related violence and aggression in the work place.

Tara joined UHSM in March as the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Lead – a new role within the hospital, working to support services to utilise inclusion and to improve overall quality of care and performance."
www.uhsm.nhs.uk/news/uhsm-employee-recognised-in-national-awards/

I suggest people take copies of this thread in case it's pulled. (I've done).

It's easy - 2 ways:

• go to print the page but then save it as a PDF instead of actually printing it
• copy and paste to a Word Doc or Google Drive doc

Michelle Brewer & the other lawyer addressing, (or 'being grilled by' according to Sophie W) WEP members, were invited because they are the lawyers (among others I sincerely hope) advising the govt on the GRA reforms

The relationship between Stonewall/PinkNews/TRAs is quite interesting

Relationship between Prides & Stonewall is also interesting:

this article was published by GayStar News the week before Pride London:
'Prides slam Stonewall for failing to support them, demand apology
In a survey of UK Prides, the country’s leading LGBT charity was rated just ‘three out of 10’
(extract)
"Pride events across Britain are calling for a public apology from leading LGBT charity Stonewall, GSN can exclusively reveal.

They are also demanding the charity changes its ways, with one Pride accusing it of ‘acting like the bloody LGBT police’. Other Prides accuse Stonewall of taking credit for their work but failing to support them.

Gay Star News has obtained a copy of the results of the survey of Pride organisers. The UK Pride Organisers Network will present the report to Stonewall when they meet with the charity in the next few minutes. (continues)

The survey indicates Pride groups have a number of complaints about Britain’s leading lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender charity, going back a number of years.

But two events appear to have triggered the UK Pride Organisers Network and European Pride Organisers Association to survey their members.

In February this year, Stonewall pulled out of Pride in London, claiming it had failed to include and represent people of color. Instead, Stonewall threw its weight behind UK Black Pride.

However, some black and Asian people disagreed with Stonewall’s decision, saying they felt they were being forced to choose between the two events. They also said the charity should have consulted them before making the decision.

Then in May, Stonewall announced they were partnering with budget clothing and homeware store Primark. Primark will give 20% of the proceeds of its 2018 Pride collection to the charity.

Prides are angry the cash is going to a comparatively well-off charity, while many of them are struggling.

Again there is some history to the row. Last year, Primark angered Manchester Pride by selling Pride-branded products in the city but not supporting the event. Primark’s branch in Manchester, north west England, is believed to be the biggest of the firm’s 257 worldwide stores.
And it is likely to make uncomfortable reading for the charity. (continues)

The biggest take-away from the comments from Prides which completed the survey is that Stonewall should work in partnership with them.

They want the charity to show ‘humility’. Some indicated Stonewall currently tries to control what Prides do. One called on the organisation to ‘Stop acting like the bloody LGBT Police. They need to “get over it”.’

The UK Pride Organisers Network report makes several recommendations.

They ask Stonewall to share the profits from Primark between Prides and organisations working in Turkey, Myanmar and China.

In addition they want Stonewall chief executive, Ruth Hunt, to say sorry. They want her to acknowledge ‘the disquiet among Pride organisers about their conduct’ and commit to working with Prides in future.

Moreover, they want Stonewall to promise they won’t take any future sponsorship or fundraising deal that ‘includes the word Pride’. This is likely to prove a difficult pledge for Stonewall to make, given their need to fundraise."
www.gaystarnews.com/article/pride-stonewall-support-apology/#gs.5691kaY

It was also notable how much criticism was directed at Pride London's organising committee after the 'Get the L Out' especially by some of those connected with Stonewall such as Aimee Challoner:

www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/over-1000-people-have-signed-an-open-letter-condemning-pride-in-london-for-letting-an-anti-trans-group-lead-the-march/09/07/

CostMary

No, so far they are the only two ‘speakers’ (respondents) invited. SW seems to think that this is an equitable situation that gives members the opportunity to “grill” them. The obvious concern (apart from the peculiar image this arrangement presents) is that questioning needs to be sufficiently well-informed of the legal background, terminology and gameplan to be effective.

Spectator article:
'The limits of Stonewall’s tolerance'
Josephine Bartosch
(extract)
"Instead of listening to the concerns of the women protesting [at Pride London], or acknowledging that there is a discussion to be had on this subject, Stonewall simply stuck to its line that transwomen are women, dismissing any deviation from this as ‘transphobic’. Stonewall’s chief executive Ruth Hunt said that the lesbians involved in the protest ‘have deserted the fight for LGBT equality’ and ‘have no place at Pride’. So much for ‘Acceptance without exception’.

Thankfully, Hunt’s outrage that there are other perspectives on transgender identities is not shared by all of those originally involved in setting up Stonewall. Simon Fanshawe, one of the co-founders of the charity, argues that Stonewall has ‘a historic responsibility to enable calm reasoned debate’. It is hard to see how Hunt’s response meets that test. Fanshawe says he fears that voices – including those of transgender people, some of whom prefer to describe themselves as ‘transsexual’ – are in danger of being drowned out by the reaction of the likes of Stonewall. He says:

‘Some transgender people are proud to identify themselves as ‘transmen’ and ‘transwomen,’ not simply as ‘men’ and ‘women’ and they feel marginalised by the language and ideology that seeks to diminish this difference. I do not wish to invalidate anyone’s experience, but by not acknowledging there is a debate to be had Stonewall are failing in their duty to LGBT communities to enable self-determination for all trans people.’

So why are alternative voices being ignored? A brief glance at the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group perhaps offers an answer: those who were born male appear to outnumber females by about two to one (a similar ratio to MPs in the House of Commons). Do those who sit on the advisory group have to hold the view that stated gender identity takes precedence over biological sex? It would seem so. Take Alex Drummond, for example, a transwoman who claims to be ‘widening the bandwidth of how to be a woman’ by sporting a full beard alongside the accoutrements of femininity (skirts and make-up). It is not transphobic to suggest that someone with a male body who wears female clothes has no place identifying as a lesbian; it is simply a different perspective.

In an interview in the Guardian in 2014, Hunt said: ‘I am not interested in being the thought police.’ Yet four years on, lesbians who fail to accept male bodied transwomen like Drummond as women are demonised by Hunt as apparently ‘working against’ the LGBT community. (continues)

(concludes)
"Despite the attempts to dismiss them as something of a fringe group, ‘Get The L out’s protest at this year’s Pride actually reflects a deeper malaise in the lesbian, gay and bisexual communities. There is a desperate need for reasoned debate in order to allow all sides to have their say. Unfortunately, the response of Stonewall has been to shout louder and smear those who do not toe the trendy identity politics line. By championing the rights of male-bodied lesbians, Stonewall are abandoning the very people they should exist to support and making a mockery of the struggles we still face. It is somewhat depressing that, in 2018, the views of lesbians, bisexual people and gay men are being cast aside by the very organisation that claims to push for ‘acceptance without exception.’

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/07/the-limits-of-stonewalls-tolerance/

It seems inconceivable that Tara Hewitt was not aware of the 9 protected characteristics of the 2010 Equalities Act.

Tara knows perfectly well that it is sex.

Surely its therefore potentially a serious issue to have drawn up diversity and equality policies & monitoring systems for both patients and staff which do not include sex?

I wonder who was eventually appointed as the specialist advisor to the Women & Equalities Committee inquiry into sexual harassment?

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/news-parliament-2017/specialist-adviser-role-17-19/

Is Ada’s use of language a stylistic quirk of a niche movement that I’m not part of (gamer culture or fanfic or some such)?

Only it seems to have some commonalities with the JB whistleblower’s twitter thread?

To clarify, I’m not making specific allegations as to who authored the twitter thread, just looking for wider cultural comparisons.

'NHS England and NHS Scotland Analysis of public consultation on
proposed service specifications for specialised Gender Identity Services for Adults'
(published earlier this year)

See Executive summary for weight given to input from both NUS and Action for Trans Health (both Jess Bradley?)
(extract)
"Current, former or prospective user of gender identity services:
There was significant similarity between the themes that were raised by respondents in this group and by organisations representing the interests of trans and non-binary people."

www.engage.england.nhs.uk/survey/gender-identity-services-for-adults/user_uploads/report-independent-analysis-consultation-responses-gender-identity-service-specifications.pdf

Olenna that should be publically available information and would usually be stated on the committee's report.

And yes, considering the very specific NHS guidelines relating to mixed sex wards, there is no way an NHS advisor could’ve mistakenly omitted sex or accidentally conflated sex and gender in a report.

And yes, regarding which orgs have gotten the ear of government in recent times WHY isn’t it the very-well-established groups, such as The Beaumont Society (founded 1966)?

TBS website has their submission to the 2015 transgender equality comission - I’ve only skimmed it - will look at it properly tomorrow:

www.beaumontsociety.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/SubmissiontoCommons.pdf

BettyDuMonde You may be interested to read the UHSM policy with regards single sex wards:

see:
4.1
5.4.3

www.uhsm.nhs.uk/content/uploads/2015/12/2.8.2-Privacy-and-Dignity-Policy-V3.pdf

UHSM
4.1 Same Sex Accommodation
For hospital accommodation to be deemed “same sex”, it must provide sleeping areas and
toilet and washing facilities that are for men and women only. This means patients could
be:-
 In a same sex ward, where the whole ward is either men or women only
 In a single room or
 In a mixed ward, where men and women are in separate bays or rooms
 Toilet and washing facilities are for either men or women
(DoH guidance- Eliminating Mixed Sex Accommodation, 2010)

4.2 Trans is an umbrella term used to define a range of different gender variant identities.
However in respect of this policy the term is used to describe any person who intends to or has permanently transitioned to a different gender from their birth gender.

5.4.3 Transsexual Patients
Trans patients enjoy legal protection against discrimination. In addition good practice requires clinical responses be patient-centred, respectful and flexible towards all transgender people who do not meet these criteria but who live continuously or temporarily in the gender role that is opposite to their natal sex. They must be accommodated according to their presentation - the way they dress and the name and pronouns that they
currently use (please refer to 4.2).
5.4.3 (i) Those who have undergone full-time transition should always be accommodated according to their gender presentation. Different genital or breast sex appearance is not a bar to this, since sufficient privacy can usually be ensured through the use of curtains or by accommodation in a single side room adjacent to a sex-appropriate ward. This approach may only be varied under special circumstances where, for instance, the treatment is sexspecific
and necessitates a Trans person being placed in an otherwise opposite sex ward.
Such departures should be proportionate to achieving a ‘legitimate aim’, for instance, a safe nursing environment. This may arise, for instance, when a Trans man is having a hysterectomy in a hospital, or hospital ward that is designated specifically for women, and
no side room is available. The situation should be discussed with the individual concerned and a joint decision made as to how to resolve it.
At all times this should be done according to the wishes of the patient, rather than the convenience of the staff.
5.4.3 (ii) In addition to these safeguards, where admission/triage staff are unsure of a person’s gender, they should, where possible, ask discreetly where the person would be most comfortably accommodated. They should then comply with the patient’s preference immediately, or as soon as practicable. If patients are transferred to a ward, this should also be in accordance with their continuous gender presentation (unless the patient requests
otherwise).

5.4.3.(vi) Gender variant children and young people should be accorded the same respect for their self-defined gender as are Trans adults, regardless of their genital sex. There is no segregation, as is often the case with children, there may be no requirement to treat a young gender variant person any differently from other children and young people. Where segregation is deemed necessary, then it should be in accordance with the dress, preferred name and/or stated gender identity of the child or young person. In some instances, parents or those with parental responsibility may have a view that is not consistent with the child’s view. If possible, the child’s preference should prevail even if the child is not Gillick
competent.

5.4.3.(vii) More in-depth discussion and greater sensitivity may need to be extended to adolescents whose secondary sex characteristics have developed and whose view of their gender identity may have consolidated in contradiction to their sex appearance. It should be borne in mind that they are extremely likely to continue to experience a gender identity that is inconsistent with their natal sex appearance, so their current gender identity should be fully supported in terms of their accommodation and use of toilet and bathing facilities. It should also be noted that, although rare, children may have conditions where genital appearance is not clearly male or female and therefore personal privacy may be a priority

NB this is from UHSM website V 3 November 2014, states Next review date March 2018 so may be modified.

(No time to give this any sensible thought today but how the f**k would the law of any country be able to reconcile ‘non-binary’ gender people in a world set up for two sexes? The conflation of sex and gender surely only works in TRA favour if non-binary people don’t exist?)