How to fight this

[NotZenEnough]

It seems that this has been slowly creeping up on us for decades. Tiny incremental changes which seemed petty to fight at the time are now the norm and have accumulated to create a situation where we have utter madness, and it gets worse every day. Men empowered to use women's toilets, guides and brownies are packed off on holiday and parents are not told if a man will be sharing a room with them. So many examples.....
I wonder whether starting a few single issue petitions would be a good way to grab people's attention? Ideas:

1. girl guides: please ensure that parents are informed if someone other than a biological woman will be in any of the following situations with brownies or guides: sharing sleeping accommodation, sharing or accompanying them to a bathroom.
2. gov't: please ensure that crime statistics are recorded as having been committed by the biological sex of the perpetrator and not by their chosen gender identity.
3. schools, please do not allow or encourage children to transition without open discussion with parents. Allowing children to conduct confide tip conversations with adults in a school setting undermines safeguarding best practise.

So many topics. Thought please?

I’m afraid that point 1 & 2 are asking people to act in contravention of the 2010 Equality Act, so even if you get lots of signatures, you won’t get any organisations putting it into practice.

Hmmm. I supposed I'm approaching this fro the angle of trying to raise awareness. I'm struggling to engage people in rl. Think people assume bigot and switch off.

Well 1&2 are where exemptions to the EA should be being used.

There is a strong argument for a girl only space.

Crime statistics become meaningless if we can't distinguish on sex and criminal behaviour patterns do differ.

EA needs properly testing and/or strengthening. Organisations should start to see a few of these TRA organisations in court.

1 and 2 are perfect examples of where the exemptions should be used.

A majority of people don't realise this is happenning as it's so disingenuous and all about being supporting to trans people. Not a policy that is discussed openly.

So, yes, am awareness campaign would be good. If this is what the law means (as AWA are claiming, and pp above RedHoodGirl is saying, making it clear that THIS is the law surely can't be a problem.

Unless people think it's something to be hidden from the daylight.

And I don't think that that's the law anyway. The govt has reassured us that 'equality act' so don't worry.

It's a slight tangent but I'm currently reading a marketing book called 'Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die' (Heath) It is from a business/marketing perspective but it is aimed at people who need to get 'ideas' across to people and have people remember and buy into those ideas (teachers, public health official etc). It looks at how people broke down complex, and often serious, ideas into a simple core message and how they got that message across. There's a number of common factors but it basically boils down to:

1. One, simple, core message (if you tell someone 3 things, you tell them nothing)
2. Unexpected (something that makes people sit up and go 'oh')
3. Credible (coming from a respected source)
4. Emotional (appeal to a core emotion)
5. Concrete (filled with images people can easily remember)
6. Stories (tells some kind of story) They gave a good example where the public health guy for America was trying to get across to people how much fat was in a serving of popcorn in a cinema. They had tried "there are blah blah grams of fat...recommended daily limit etc' without success. What worked (and saw popcorn sales fall dramatically) was holding a press conference where they laid out a table with bacon and egg breakfast, a big mac and fries and a steak dinner and said 'a serving of popcorn has more artery clogging fat than all of this food-combined!' Maybe we could think of this as a 'marketing campaign'? Come up with a core, single message and visual idea that represents self-id. It's hard with a very multi-faceted problem but people do have problems remembering information if they are presented with too much information at once. I'll finish the book and see if anything comes to mind!

RedHoodGirl is mistaken; the EA allows for exemptions and only adults can transition.

I wish people would understand the Equality Act before invoking it. There is absolutely provision for single sex spaces and for crimes committed by men to be recorded as such.

howlsmovingcastle84 Thats very interesting.

@howlsmovingcastle84 very interesting. I might start a few micro-issue petitions and see if there is any effect.

@orchidinthesun I genuinely have naff all idea about a lot of the legal technicalities on this and am relying on twitter mn and articles for info, sorry getting stuff wrong but please advise. I did read somewhere that if changes to the GRA are made and self identification is legally permissible then criminals will be registered as their identified gender and not natal sex,

I didn't mean you NotZen! I meant RedHoodGirl :)

I think your three ideas are good. I also think polling parents of Girl Guides and seeing what they think about having boys and men who identify as girls and women sharing spaces with their daughters without their knowledge. From the comments on the Times article today, I suspect most of them will take a pretty dim view

redhood that is incorrect - both examples 1 and 2 are where the EA exemptions should Be applied.

I think the best way to fight this is to talk about it more widely. In as much media as possible. The recent articles in the Daily Mail show a real change in both being able to report and HOW this is reported.

The first few articles that talked about the ManFriday protests used language that pitched it as ‘femninists Eh!? They wanted equality hur hur.’ That’s easy to dismiss. They also had very ‘freakshow’ style reporting on average transpeople just living their lives (which isn’t good either.)
Now we are seeing more nuanced reports which discuss the implications of all this - girl guides, male rapists in women’s prisons, etc. The language has changed. It was ‘hairy feminists’ now it’s ‘women.’ That’s a big change in reporting style and a big change in the underlying way the story is sold to the public.

People are very down on the tabloids (often with good reason) but sometimes they will print stuff other outlets won’t. I’ve said for a long time that until the DM et al are printing stories this won’t reach the wider public.

Now they are running stories daily.

As much sunlight as possible is how we expose this.

What got me aware of these issues was Posies brilliant question-does my 11 year old daughter have a right not to see a male penis in the gym changing rooms? (Think was gym/swimming) Anyway, that was a very visual, practical, real situation that I instantly understood to be a problem.
Also as many have said before-why do we have sex segregated spaces? For the protection of women & children. Who gains if these safeguards are taken away? predatory men. It would seem that the law as it currently stands is simply not fit for purpose.

Redhood Girl you are talking complete nonsense. Of course males and females should be separated in terms of recording crime statistics and the single sex exemptions can be used. Only male GRC holders (about 3k of them) legally are included with the female sex characteristic. The rest are legally male.

Ereshkgal there are instances when 'women in dresses' are recorded in the press as committing a crime, accompanied by a photo of men in dresses committing said crime. Remember the one in The Metro paper in London-4 men in dresses kicked the shit out of a 19 yr old because he looked at them funnily....it was not reported factually. The Police said they record crimes in line with peoples gender id.

Public service announcement

Beware people talking complete shite about the law. I'm seeing a lot on here, and I think it's a deliberate tactic to try to scare people into silence.

So - single sex spaces. Perfectly legal under the equalities act in order to satisfy a proportionate need. Thus, single sex rather than gender showers and changing rooms in a gym club, for e.g., are perfectly legal.

GRC - doesn't establish that someone has "literally" changed sex (because that would be impossible). It creates the legal fiction that in most but not all circumstances, the person with the GRC has the right to be treated legally as if they were a member of the sex on their GRC. It does not act as a carte blanche to gain access all areas - because the equalities act still allows for exceptions in the case of proportionate need for single sex spaces.

Misgendering - not a crime. In some circumstances, e.g. when used to deliberately harass and upset someone, you might be guilty of another crime, e.g. in this instance the crime of harassment (just as repeatedly phoning your ex at 3.00am to call him an adulterous shit would open you to a charge of harassment even if he was actually, as a matter of fact, an adulterous shit). But misgendering in and of itself is not a crime.

Deadnaming - similarly, not a crime.

Well, a nice simple message to wake up the Woke for girl guides is making it clear that dd will be able to sleep with her boyfriend on guide camp if she wants.

All he has to do is say he’s a she.

I think that’s more relatable to the general public than the discussion over a potential leader not being biologically female. And a pregnancy as a result of a guide camp is NOT going to be good publicity for GG.

Yes something like

Update your packing list for Guide Camps - make sure your children take condoms!

Whether your Guider has a penis or a vagina, they should both carry condoms, as we all know what might happen, as our children are still only young and may not have their impulse control under control.

Discuss pregnancy with your menstruating (or pre-menstruating) Guider. Discuss the potential for the sperm in their ejaculate with your erection-capable Guider.

Condoms - a new essential for all Guide camps!

It needs vigorously publicising that GG have been taking advice on safeguarding for children from Jane Fae (champion of extreme porn) and quite possibly David Challoner, paedophile rapist (who was a scout leader, with access to and responsibility for children).

And that Aimee and David Challoner and Jess Bradley have been involved in advising nationally and helping draw up guidance removing the safeguarding and rights of women and children at a national level, including the NHS and government.

That advice is fatally compromised and has proven that those advocating the removal of sex segregation and safeguarding include those whose behaviour is proven in the public domain and who would benefit in offending opportunities by the outcomes they are seeking.

The condoms advice sickens me. Are young girls supposed to hope that in the event of sexual abuse being enabled by this insane policy that their abuser has nipped along to the Guide Leader first to get a condom?

Condoms - a new essential for all Guide camps!

Yes, this.

We need the Daily Fail on this one.

As well as really publicising the background of these people who are providing this advice.

Ereshkgal there are instances when 'women in dresses' are recorded in the press as committing a crime,

Yes I know. Im disagreeing with the assertion that it is an EA requirement.

Is it actually that most organisations are pretty sure that sex separation is legal, but they don't want to be the ones to face the actuvistis in a court case? So on the basis that women are at the end of the unlikely to take things beyond a good natter, they cede to the activists?

In that case the only solution would be to make them equally affeared of a women led court case?

The organisations need to know that at the first opportunity they will face a legal challenge for breaking the equality act ? How could we make that message?

Is it actually that most organisations are pretty sure that sex separation is legal, but they don't want to be the ones to face the actuvistis in a court case?

This is exactly why the proposal to make services etc justify the exemptions on a case by case basis is flawed. The first to do so will face the TRA wrath.

The illogic of the Self ID argument and how it will take away sex based protections from those that need them most, summed up perfectly in one simple meme...To expose Self ID, all it takes is applying the concept of being afforded the rights and protections and service provision of any oppressed group, disenfranchised by a characteristic when you are not actually affected by the oppression as you don't possess the bloody characteristic. If this were affecting any other oppressed group, people would be rightfully outraged. Women, not so much.

I have pointed out to my MP that if self ID goes through and enshrines in law the right to access special provision based on identifying as having a characteristic as opposed to objectively, provably having it, then that's it. How are the government planning to say no to the trans abled when they want blue badges, mobility aids, hoists and wet rooms, wheelchair adapted cars, provide disability benefits and carers to change nappies and do baths? How will you pick the genuinely trans abled from piss takers? How are they planning to say no to the trans aged when they want a place at the local Brownies (lets face it, GG will welcome them with open arms), after school club, child tickets and access to child facilities like the local soft play centre with their 'carer', the children's ward at the hospital?

These are already a thing. They are heavily male dominated and heavily linked to sexual paraphilias which would inevitably lead to acting these out in public places and involving bystanders (children included) as props in a sexual experience, while heavily blurring safeguarding and appropriate sexual boundaries even further. To draw a line on any of these will be impossible as those lines will have been erased by law.

To quote Rees-Mogg, 'other people have rights too'.