Shocked by YHA transgender policy wording

[CliffsofMoherVisitor]

I think this is the first time I have posted in this section. I have quietly read the threads for months as a lurker and become increasingly horrified at the creeping intrusion of males into women's spaces/sports.

What's prompted me to post is stumbling on the YHA's transgender policy. As you may already know (and it has been discussed before here, it is no longer single-sex dormitories - males can self-id as females and sleep in the female dormitory and vice versa. Reading the policy, it sounds like the YHA are trying to do the right thing (they quote the gender reassignment parts of the Equality Act), but it feels like they simply haven't thought it through.

The self-ID part of the policy and all its implications is troubling - self-IDing adult males sleeping in the same room/bunk as female children for example - how do you safeguard against a predator simply lying about their identity? But the line in the policy that upset me most was in relation to the sex-specific exemptions in the Equality Act as follows:

"In certain circumstances we may choose to invoke these exemptions; however, this is not as a rule. An example of these circumstances is people who have been the victims of abuse. In such situations we would work with all parties to provide a solution while still ensuring access everyone has access to our services. We invite people who meet the above criteria to get in touch with us in advance; please contact our customer care department at [email protected]. Individual requests will be dealt with on a case by case basis. Please be aware that these requests can take up to 14 days to process."

Am I correct in my reading that a female victim of abuse has to not only reveal this to the YHA, but do so 14 days in advance of their stay to ensure a female-only space? What if a transgender person arrives without a booking on the day? Is a female meant to go to the desk of the Youth Hostel and reveal their traumatic history to the receptionist? Then the receptionist decides what to do? What if there is no other accommodation available? Some Youth Hostels are in remote places. I find this statement absolutely mind-boggling in its impracticality, and sheer disregard for the experiences of abused women.

I feel so sad, I such good experiences Youth Hostelling as a teenager and a young woman, and I always stayed in YHA due to feeling safer as a single female ("Backpacker" hostels were often mixed sex dormitories). I did this even though YHA was usually more expensive.

I have always had a soft spot for YHA and think (thought) that they did good work for example doing trips for inner city kids to get out and experience the countryside, do hiking etc and of course, allowing a cheap yet safe place for females to stay when travelling. Therefore, even though I am more a Premier Inn type these days, I have always maintained my YHA membership via yearly standing order to support them - going back over 20 years now.

I'm not against trans-gender people using YHA at all - with segregation by sex, not by gender "identity", as it was originally. Perhaps with the provision of a third space open to both sexes? ie Male, Female and Mixed.

So - I think I have to cancel my standing order :( Should I write and tell them why, or will they label any protest "transphobia"?

Link to current YHA policy

I stayed in a mixed dorm many years ago while interailling with my boyfriend, in a dorm with double bunk beds! I remember the disgust and fear at hearing a man in the dorm masturbating during the night, even though I knew I was safe with my BF. I’d be terrified if I was now in my own with my DD and had to lay in bed listening to that.

Raisins - I had the same experience and I was on my own. It was awful.

EverardDigby - Isn't case by case misinterpreted? E.g. the "case" is the sleeping accommodation or the women's refuge, it's not individual people. This is what needs restating.

Not so much misinterpreted as completely made up. Case-by-case is not in the EA itself, it appears in EHRC's Statutory Code of Practice and they do mean 'case' to refer to individual people not individual settings.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/services-public-functions-and-associations-statutory-code-practice

Reading the post-consultation report on the statutory code from 2011 shows how policy capture happened - usual suspects: GIRES, Press For Change, a:gender

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/equality-act-codes-practice-post-consultation-report

Also 'case by case' use by certain pressure groups is wonky.

Eg I'd have thought
Women's dorms default is single sex, needs to be an exceptional reason to let a man in (care by case)

NOT

Women's dorms by default allow anyone in who says 'I'm female' or that are assumed to be female, wear clothes associated with being female etc etc ie are mixed sex by default,
But some people who want to go in may be refused on a case by case basis

It's totally cockeyed.

Most important questions on that Twitter thread:

• Who delivered the training that led to this policy?

• Were they by any chance a political pressure group? What is their known agenda?

• What adjustments were made for their bias and fact checking, aka due diligence, before creating policy change?

• Where's your Equality Impact Assessment?

Ooh and of course:

• Were your trainers by any chance qualified in safeguarding? Qualified in the Equality planning, policy and needs of any other groups OTHER than T? What were their professional backgrounds and qualifications to deliver training leading to such major policy change?

Thank god I've never been assaulted but maybe some brave women should send the lovely people at YHA frank and honest accounts of attacks and how this has had a real impact on their lives and health and feelings of safety (lack of).

Then let them tell us that a male person is under utter despair if they can’t sleep alongside women so must be allowed to at all costs (no questions asked).

Don’t all hold your breaths...

Equality I guess. Not every male bodied woman is a rapist. Jes sayin....

Just musing but I wonder if a ‘Shame the YHA day’ is whats needed. En masse requests by women requesting non mtf dorms for their stay?
If they still persist in their shameful treatment of women and girls who have been abused and are then expected to disclose that for an overnight stay they need to rebrand as the MHA ..... although that may lead to people confusing them with MRA. Rather ironic.

Alexisa then there's no need for sex segregation in any circs.

Which orgs need to state if that's what it is.

Yha single sex dorms are in fact be mixed sex.
Single sex wards in hosp are mixed sex.
Single sex changing facilities including communal are mixed sex etc

Why is the pretence that womens privacy (and mens) is still considered in situations where they allow mixed sex if someone of the opposite sex wants in with the boys / girls?

Honesty would be better then women/ girls could know where to avoid.

Communal accommodation comes under schedule 23 of the EA. The single sex provision is there 'for reasons of privacy'.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/23/crossheading/communal-accommodation

I appreciate you believe that male bodied people can be women. I don't share your belief. It is not considered appropriate for all men to share sleeping space with women, I don't want exceptions made for any males regardless of how they identify. Not to mention that self ID allows any male T or not to enter women's spaces with full legal protection to be there, and that male may be Karen White, or JY or any of the other males who have busily used this narrative to offend.

If you want to share with male bodied people that's your choice, please do. But equally respect that many women want to have that choice, and have good reason.

Raisins and Time - me too on an Indian sleeper train. I was with 2 girlfriends in a 4 bunk coach thinking we had booked it out (but ticket inspector said that we hadn't and the man could stay). I don't think any of us slept.

Ive just done a re tweet of this and other issues. I thought I'd reached Peak Trans, but every day something else comes along ☹️

Sorry going back on the thread a bit Evarard that certainly should be what "case by case" means but it is not what the EHRC mean in the statutory code of practice, which refers to case by case in the context of an individual trans person. I do not think this is an accurate reflection of what the Equality Act says but unfortunately the code has alot of legal dorce:

As stated at the beginning of this chapter, any exception to the prohibition of discrimination must be applied as restrictively as possible and the denial of a service to a transsexual person should only occur in exceptional circumstances. A service provider can have a policy on provision of the
service to transsexual users but should apply this policy on a case-by-case basis in order to determine whether the exclusion of a transsexual person is
proportionate in the individual circumstances. Service providers will need to
balance the need of the transsexual person for the service and the detriment
to them if they are denied access, against the needs of other service users
and any detriment that may affect them if the transsexual person has access
to the service. To do this will often require discussion with service users
(maintaining confidentiality for the transsexual service user). Care should be
taken in each case to avoid a decision based on ignorance or prejudice. Also, the provider will need to show that a less discriminatory way to achieve the
objective was not available.

TheCuriousMonkey

Did they honestly think, when they were writing that, that's it means grown men sharing dorms with little girls?

Sorry about wall of text - my paragraphs and bolding failed miserably.

My colleague was telling me how her and her bf went to a national trust property on her mum's membership. The entry desk woman queried if the 6ft male with a beard was really called Sandra. They said "of cause" shock horror!!! And were let in.

A tangent, I know, but I think it slows people are terrified to be labelled transphobic, even when it's obvious that some people are piss taking!

Technically, at youth hostels, you have to show id (driving licence), so I guess that is a small step (and I mean small, as you can change a sex marker on the passport by self id) to protecting women. It's not good enough.

People need to have clarity about if a dorm is mixed sex or single sex. The only time I ended up in a mixed sex dorm I had to bollock a bloke for lying there flicking his lighter..... in a room full of wooden bunks. He was an idiot, rather than a perv, admittedly. I just feel our rights are being totally ignored here, as per usual.

Send us fine but as soon as gender rears it’s ugly and irrelevant head, common sense goes out of the window. They may be able to ask ‘gender’ but would balk at asking a persons sex.

'Technically, at youth hostels, you have to show id (driving licence), so I guess that is a small step (and I mean small, as you can change a sex marker on the passport by self id)'

Only the person who made the booking has to show ID. So if someone is with another person or group they don't.

On a theme ... anyone logged in to spinster.xyz?

'To do this will often require discussion with service users (maintaining confidentiality for the transsexual service user)'

But women who have been victims of sexual 'abuse' (not just any old sex crime, there is an implication that severity will be judged) needs to supply yha with details of the abuse at least 14 days in advance of her stay, yha will then make a judgement on whether she will be allowed to sleep in a room without a man / Men.

That feels very even handed.

Why don't they just say its mixed sex ffs. At least that's clear. Then women and girls can make (have made for them) an informed decision.

It's like with the guides. Why so coy? Girl guides is now mixed sex org. In fact they claim, iirc, that they have always been mixed sex. That they were always single gender only. Ok then make an announcement etc. Let girls and their parents know that boys might be there on away trips, bunking in with the girls, with no specific risk assessments as the leaders are to pretend that they are literally female.

Equality I guess. Not every male bodied woman is a rapist. Jes sayin....

No one is saying they all are, and also, they don't all need to be, for something horrible to happen. Furthermore, they don't need to be at all, for the policy to be upsetting and frightening for women if they have to sleep alongside a male-bodied person with a penis.

This straw man accusation that anyone with concerns is implying trans women are all rapists is such literally bollocks. Just as not all men are predatory, not all trans women are. The fact that not all men are predatory doesn't change the fact that women have been able to sleep and get changed separately from men because of the general risk, and even if there is no actual risk, the discomfort and fear.

However, IF you change the rules so that any man can announce they are a woman and then share that space, the predatory ones WILL see the opportunity to join the queue - as they so often have wherever an opportunity to abuse is offered.

On a theme ... anyone logged in to spinster.xyz?

Won’t let me sign up, new member applications closed until Thursday...