"After some very moving contributions, TUC unanimously supports gender self-declaration"

[R0wantrees]

Comment by Ian Murch, Treasurer at National Union Of Teachers section of National Education Union

twitter.com/ianmurch/status/1039470003920293888

Lucy Masood:
"Proud of the FBU and PaulEmbery for ensuring that we did not vote to support the GRA Self ID resolution at the TUC today. The FBU cares and listens to its female members"

twitter.com/luluchops1/status/1039475527139164160

WPUK have now published comprehensive information about how we can respond, under different headings. All email addresses are provided.

1. There are questions for the members union

1. Specific questions for Frances O'Grady and the Women's Officer about the TUC's contribution to the GRA consultation, in the light of motion 41

1. Requesting information from the Women's Committee about whether or not they were consulted, or otherwise involved in TUC policy; and what their role will be when the TUC responds to the GRA

womansplaceuk.org/a-womans-place-is-in-her-union/

I'm not getting over the perfidy of Unison any time soon (and I'm not one of their members).

Via Kathleen Stock.

ScottishWomen wrote: UNISON called for the removal of sex-based exemptions at W&E Committee. Also, UNISON guidance was written by the manager of a Trans lobby group

MsDemocracy wrote: Here it is in black and white, point 6.5. unisontweets told WomenEqualities it should remove women and girls' legal rights to single sex services. It said service providers should no longer be allowed sex exemptions when 'judged to be proportionate' (the tweet gives the link but it won't work here so I've put the link below)

data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/transgender-equality/written/19481.html

twitter.com/DemocracyMs/status/1040267147870699520

NUT members I’ve been advised to write to Mary Bousted and Kevin C (will need to check surname). And that it is very much worth doing so.

I’m also going to write to the union about the resources I mentioned upthread. Feeling determined today that we can do something!

Link to conference session - motion 41 starts around 2:22:00 mark.

Kevin C (will need to check surname)

It's Courtney. He's on Twitter as @cyclingkev.

Interesting that Mark Serwotka (Ruth's DH) has been announced as new President of the TUC. He has been criticised for his scepticism about the GRA. But could be a positive influence?

MsDemocracy wrote: Here it is in black and white, point 6.5. unisontweets told WomenEqualities it should remove women and girls' legal rights to single sex services. It said service providers should no longer be allowed sex exemptions when 'judged to be proportionate'

This is appalling.

Emailed Unite this morning. Will report back.

Just watched the video posted by golly gosh. Please watch it, if you can stomach it. It's motion 41 two thirds of the way in. One speaker saying she is happy to share changing rooms with her trans sisters because twaw. That's great. Just make the decision on behalf of all of us. Lots of recognition that GRA reform won't require medicalisation of transing so cannot argue ignorance that willies will be in the changing rooms too.

Then the prison or was it probation woman talking about her client who commits suicide. This is days after Karen White?!!!!

Speech after speech affirming that our rights won't be affected. This can only hold true if you subscribe to TWAW.

I feel angry all over again!
Please join me in despair and watch it.

Can someone explain the UNISON information posted above please?

So Unison made a submission to the Women and Equalities Committee recommending the removal of the right to provision of single-sex services where it is judged to be proportionate? Is that right?

Ironic that they also call for "the strengthening of the Public Sector Equality Duty, including the restoration of the duty to consult with groups affected" but don't appear to have consulted with women or girls on their call to remove sex-based protections.

I have not publicly put my head above the parapet yet but this has made me so angry. I am trying to put together an email to them that makes it clear that my views are NOT transphobic (though I am sure that if it's read by someone unsympathetic they will roll their eyes and say TERF whatever I say) but that this is hideous treatment of their female membership.

Any advice would be much appreciated as I haven't done this before.

Spanner I would consider complaining to your union a safe way of speaking up, as there is no reason any of your colleagues should find out.

If you check out the twitter thread by Dr Fond of Beetles there is some clear advice on complaining. Also check out a women's place website or even contact them for advice directly, I am certain they will guide you well.

Thanks Wishes. I will do that.

Watched all the submissions for motion 41 this morning, thanks for the link. I found it deeply disingenuous how they all mentioned how "toxic" the debate had become and how the condemned abuse "from all quarters" at exactly the same time as talking about how trans people get attacked in the workplace etc. People not familiar with the debate would think the abuse was all one way, towards trans people. This is absolutely not the case.

Also the female speakers didn't seem to understand how difficult to use the EA exemptions are.

In fact all the talk about the exemptions is dishonest and transactivists will frequently go from saying that they exist so what are we worried about to saying they are impossible to use within a few words.

And the MTF speaker for Unison mentioning the women handing out Fair Play leaflets as "leafleting anti trans hate"

Eye. Roll.

"Outside this very conference"! (More or less, paraphrasing).

@SpannerInTheWorks - this is a helpful, detailed, action plan thread on what to do by Dr Fond of Beetles

twitter.com/FondOfBeetles/status/1040278590447910913

Posted too soon before including first post in the 'action thread':

For all my union friends. Many unions will not have written a response to the GRA consultation. Please contact them and ask for a full consultation with all members before they do so.

You can express disappointment with their vote on motion 41/selfID. You can assert yourself as a stakeholder (female) and ask to know why you weren’t consulted on their position, when changes to gender recognition affect the legal status of ‘female’

and then there are more parts to the plan.

Just seen this while looking at Unison's submission to the Trans Inquiry:

Further, UNISON calls for the removal of the provision for a genuine occupational requirement that the person not be trans and for the introduction of the possibility of a genuine occupational requirement that the post-holder be a trans person, as exists other protected characteristics.

So they want it to be illegal to bar a male trans person from a role for a female? But they want certain trans only roles? (Something that I support) That's fair!

data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/transgender-equality/written/19481.html

"MsDemocracy wrote: Here it is in black and white, point 6.5. unisontweets told WomenEqualities it should remove women and girls' legal rights to single sex services. It said service providers should no longer be allowed sex exemptions when 'judged to be proportionate' (the tweet gives the link but it won't work here so I've put the link below)"

Fucking fucking fucking hell.

So they want there to be NO situation in the entire world where any man who says" I'm female" should not be allowed in with the women / girls.

At least they're in line with teh girl guides, swim england, british gymnastics etc.

For sure it's highly bigoted to keep men out of places where female children are getting undressed / sleeping.

These policies were put in place by the first place by evil man hating lesbians who were hell bent on spoiling men's fun with children. Thank god it's all being rolled back now.

In other news:
Women no longer allowed to have a cunty person do their smear or other intimite procedures, elderly women cannot have cunty people do their care if they wish, prisons are to be mixed with the violent sex offenders being moved to the women's prisons first and given immediate access to the mother and baby units, and any teenage girl who wants to change for swimming needs to do so in front of a panel of wanking men.

Result: Women stop accessing services (saving teh govt money) start dying younger (savign teh govt money) stop accessing clubs, work, public facilities so much (leaving them open for men who are who they are intended for in the first place) stop accessing DV & rape support stuff (saving the govt and the police service money) and as a massive bonus men everywhere can get access to teenage girls gettign tehir kit off whenever they feel like it.

Hyperbole?

Not so much. We've had a rapist and paedophile be locked in with women on teh basis of self ID, and the women who he attacked were immediately accused of lying by trans advocates.
Girl guides states that there are no safeguarding issues with self ID as transgirls are girls so putting a teenage girl in a bedroom with one has no possible safeguarding issues
Swim England saying that teenage girls who are uncomfortable gettign naked in front of any man who says "I'm a woman" should be "re-educated"
A leading trans advocate is into wanking at bus stops and at work in an open plan office
Another leading trans advocate is the main person in teh UK who pushes for teh legalisation of extreme porn
Another leading trans advocate says girls should get tits early and suck cock
Another leading trans advcocate advises multiple orgs on allowing self ID transwomen in with the girls, including british gymnastics, they are very close to their dad who has just gone down for >20 years for child rape, the dad was involved in gymnastics clubs, they also both share a "furry" fetish
And so on and so forth

These are not people who should be advising on child safeguarding issues NOR paid attention to when they say that lettign men go anywhere they want will have no impact on women.

Sex offences shoot up in mixed changing villages

Note these are facilities WITH CUBICLES, not commual changing which is more common for orgs like swim england (often clubs lessons etc are at schools), BG ditto.

ONE predatory peadophile / sex offender getting access to these places could attack multiple children / women.

That's how they work.

There was that very young guy who worked as a charity worker, took up overseas posts etc in order to abuse children. That is a lot of effort.

The idea that predatory men will not jump at this opportunity is nuts.

They already are.

This makes me SO angry.

Why are all safeguarding principles being ripped up in favour of letting men who utter the magic words "I'm female (for an hour or so now)" do anythign they want?

ALL women I know have had MULTIPLE experiences with creepy men, starting from around age 12. Sexually predatory men who target girls are EXTREMELY COMMON.

I heard Unison tried to remove the reserved BME man’s seat on the exec recently - it was challenged (black men are under represented in British unions, despite being over represented in low paid, high risk jobs) and they capitulated.

People at the top of these institutions haven’t got a clue about the lives of the people they are supposed to be advocating for.

Lisa Muggeridge is right, we’ve got a bunch of Pomo addled elite pretenders making decisions supposedly on our behalf but the consequences of those decisions won’t ever affect them, only us.

Lisa Muggeridge is right, we’ve got a bunch of Pomo addled elite pretenders making decisions supposedly on our behalf but the consequences of those decisions won’t ever affect them, only us.

This.