Deadly Serious Question, I can apply for this if I self-identify as male, can't I?

[mollythewonderpup]

www.charityjob.co.uk/jobs/my-time/male-programme-facilitator/636485?tsId=2&referrerIsJobSearch=True&rankId=1

This jobs genuinely looks great and I meet all of the person specification. They want a 'male' but I believe I can self identify into that, am I right?

Self ID isn't law, the Equality Act 2010 is still in force (long may it remain so) and it seems to me that they are merely enforcing an exemption, as they are entitled to.

This is exactly what women's organisations should be doing but aren't. IANAL btw. It's useful to see though - if they can enforce it why can't women?

You can apply but I doubt you’d be taken seriously if you don’t have a dick.
Not trying to be flippant or unkind in any way.

The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 9, Part 1, Paragraph 1 applies to this post.

That makes clear that they are exercising an exemption to the EA. No, you can't.

Even if you could, I think we should only take the piss where an organisation is clear that it is using self ID as it's criteria for womanhood/manhood.

This is exactly what women's organisations should be doing but aren't.

This.

Even if you could, I think we should only take the piss where an organisation is clear that it is using self ID as it's criteria for womanhood/manhood

This is a advert for difficult and potentially dangerous work. The men the successful applicant will be working with may well be aggressive- the advert refers to volatile situations.

Your question isn't "deadly serious". It is trivial and trivialises what the point of this job is.

I read it as the people on the programmes you would be facilitating are male, not necessarily the job candidate. So I would say go for it.

This is exactly what women's organisations should be doing but aren't.

Well, some women's organisations aren't. I work for a women's organisation and we always quote the EA 2010 exemption in our recruitment ads (we are so 20th Century - not a bit woke...or even scared, really).

I'm actually impressed by that recruitment advert because it does acknowledge the sex class male/men as perpetrators of DV. (But I don't believe perpetrator programmes actually do much to help women and children. In my experience, perpetrator programmes just give men new tools and language to use in their abuse but maybe that's another thread...)

I agree though - we shouldn't take the piss where male sex specific services are warranted because doing that will only turn round and bite female sex specific services on the bum at some point.

Might be handy to screenshot the jobad for evidence that male people also might benefit from same sex provision though...

It says The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 9, Part 1, Paragraph 1 applies to this post. Like other posters I take that to mean the applicant should be male.

starzig - the jobad specifically states we are looking for a Male Programme Facilitator....

Yes. Facilitator for male programmes.

Yes - it's a job advert with an EA 2010 exemption.

They're looking for a male person.

Given that job ads are costed on word count and that the majority of people still understand sex based needs in service provision I can completely understand the brevity of wording in the jobad. It's open to interpretation, yes - but the vast majority of jobseekers don't analyse jobads the way we do on here....

Important job. I don't think this is a role for the gender argument.

Self-ID is not law in most places and hopefully never will be, as removing all gate keeping would leave the system open to abuse.

Where self-ID is the law I believe you still need to do a stat dec and submit it to a government department? Not sure.

I think there are cases where sex is relevant and wish Women’s shelters et al would take the same approach.

From reading the advert it seems entirely appropriate that this is a role for male applicants only. I am pleased that they are making use of the exemption. I imagine transmen with GRCs would have to be considered on a case by case basis.

We need to support use of the exemption where it is appropriate, not challenge it.

I’m disappointed it pays so little. I’d have thought it needed someone with quite a lot of life experience as well as the academic requirements. Sometimes I feel very out of touch with the ‘real’ world (I didn’t go to uni & worked in the City for financial institutions where I was well paid).

It says The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 9, Part 1, Paragraph 1 applies to this post.

Good on them.

I hope this charity uses the Act when they need a Woman for a job.

It should read looking for a male Programme Facilitator, without the capitalisation. Sloppily worded.

And I feel that decision should be respected, given the circumstances.

I must admit, I read the advert assuming that either sex could apply but the programme was for men. It's a badly written advert because of that rogue capital M, as TimeLady says, which suggests the word "Male" is part of the job title.

It's the charity sector - how come they can claim this exemption with no one throwing their toys out of the pram?

When I play that game of 'what would I do if I had £100 billion?' one of the top things is fund DV refuges for women. Women. Only women. No cocks in frocks.

Well being as the advert says they are looking for someone to work exclusively with men, they state that are looking for a male programme facilitator and they quote 'The Equality Act 2010, Schedule 9, Part 1, Paragraph 1 applies to this post'' , you would have to be deliberately pedantic or obtuse to think they will consider a female candidate / 'self-identified' male, or that the advert is in any way ambiguous. The advert is clear.

It's the charity sector - how come they can claim this exemption with no one throwing their toys out of the pram?

Because they’re excluding women, not men (rightly in this instance, IMO). The TRA only get upset when roles are reserved for women only.

It's a badly written advert because of that rogue capital M, as TimeLady says, which suggests the word "Male" is part of the job title

It probably is part of the job title. They are looking for a male to work with males as the Male Programme Facilitator. Hence the quoting of the Equality Act. The only other explanation for quoting the Equality Act is because they are exclusively looking to recruit a female to work with males as the Male Programme Facilitator on the DV programme.
You surely can't believe that would be the case?

Also, I would hazard a guess that the perpetrators of domestic violence - with whom you would be working - would not take kindly to being counselled / told how to change their behaviour by a woman!!

Which, presumably, is why this post has to be filled by a male.

They are acknowledging the inherent misogyny in this group and that the only chance they have of getting through to them would be another male.

So if you did try to self-ID you'd be massively affecting the programme's effectiveness.

The salary seems ridiculously low for the job and the qualifications needed.