Job ad for CSA counsellor - must Self ID as a Woman

[OhHolyJesus]

Ok I don't get it - is this discriminating against women who don't self-identify as women? They don't understand the exemptions do they?

https://survivorsnetwork.org.uk/about-us/join-our-staff-team/

Children’s Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (CISVA) Female at Survivors’ Network

Survivors Network are pleased to be recruiting a Children’s ISVA working with children 13 and under across Brighton & Hove and East Sussex. The Children and Young People’s service provides advocacy and support to children and young survivors of sexual violence and abuse. As a skilled case worker, you will have significant experience in working with children and vulnerable people, a commitment to working in a client-centred way and a good understanding of self care. Post holder to be largely based at our Eastbourne office, but will spend time in our central Brighton office, with travel across East Sussex.

This post is open to self-identifying women

For more information or an informal chat about this post please contact Aimee Pepper on [email protected] or 07736 294142 The closing date for applications is 9.00am on Friday 15th June 2020

This post is open to self-identifying female applicants only, as being female is deemed to be a genuine occupational requirement under Schedule 9 pt 1 of the Equality Act 2010, and is subject to an enhanced DBS check.
Survivors’ Network is an equal opportunities employer. We welcome applications from all sectors of our diverse community and applications from BME, LB and T women are particularly encouraged.

I don’t “self identify” as a woman. I don’t identify with a gender at all, because it’s a social construct. If pressed I would say I am gender free as I don’t conform to the social perception of either sex...

I am female though as determined by biological definitions.

Does that mean I am excluded from the role?

Just imagine being a child victim of sexual abuse. You are traumatised and probably in a place of deep mistrust. You're invited to a counselling session whereupon you encounter a biological male identifying as a woman.

My understanding is that this is illegal. You are allowed to use the exemptions under the Equality Act to specify that a post is only open to female applicants. You are not allowed to use them to specify that a post is only open to female applicants and trans women. This is the basis on which Jennifer James has mounted a legal challenge to Labour's women-only shortlists.

Thanks Royal I'm going to challenge this in some way, somehow.

Is it discriminatory to ask that only lesbians apply for example?

If this was for a lesbian magazine or a lesbian group or as a counsellor for lesbians who were also rape victims?

They would have men applying of course!

But to actually support people who have been abused, organisations can’t just decide to be wilfully ‘blind’ to sex? Talking about the reality of sex, gender, power and socialisation will surely be a huge factor in the process of recovering from abuse- whatever the ‘gender identity’ of the abuser is?

How far are such organisations willing to take their denial of sexed reality? would they force people to use validating pronouns to ‘respect’ their abuser’s gender identity (if that varied from sex)? In what language would they expect them to describe body parts in that discussion? Can they not see the potential for causing further damage from gaslighting and encouraging cognitive dissonance?

Yes, I think it's OK to ask for lesbians only if there's a good reason for it, though I am not a lawyer so best not take my word for it.

I would love to know what would happen if a man self-identifying as a lesbian applied.

Karen White's application is in the post ...

Again - what does identifying as a women actually mean? I don’t identify as one, I am one. Does that mean I can’t apply?

Anyone who ‘identifies as a women’ but is not one, and applies for this job, by definition negates their suitability for the job.

Why don’t these organisations actually give a shit about women and children???!!!

What really puzzles me is why is it only women who have to put up with this "self-identifying" thing?

If white people were suddenly to start saying they "identify" as black and therefore understand all about racism and the issues black people face there would (rightly) be an outcry? Same if people without disabilities were to claim they personally experienced the discriminations faced by disabled people.

So why and when has it been decided that women have to be OK with this? And why do a fair number of women accept it?

The applicant could, of course, just lie. (It's something that cannot be proven.)

Don't the "stonewall rules" say that you have to believe someone who says "I am a woman"...?

So they want to take child sex abuse victims at their lowest times and make them very responsible for validating an adults identity?

Fucks sake. These children need someone they can trust not someone whose lying to them and abusing their trust yet again.

My young children seem at ease with separating identity and biology. I wonder how it's plays out when the idea is introduced so early (school, not home). I wonder how deep it goes.

I'm pretty sure this can't be legal. It makes no sense. You can't use the exemptions under the EA to allow for only females then allow some males to apply. That would be discriminating against other males with no good reason. If you want to be 'inclusive' in this way you surely can't exclude as well.

This situation is obviously becoming more common, so let's look at the basics.
Who is more likely to be the abuser, particularly sexually or physically violent, of young children under the age of 13?
That would be - men.
What would the likely reaction of a young and vulnerable child, who was placed under the care of a male bodied person, when they had been abused by a male?
I think this is a totally shocking situation, moreso because I believe it has been deliberately manufacted by very disingenuous people.

It is shocking. It's all so cleverly managed and so difficult to counter.

This is ABUSE. Pure and simple. Expecting child who has suffered child sexual abuse to pretend that they can't recognise their counsellor is man not a woman is ABUSE.

I am a survivor of CSA. This would have tipped me over the edge.. It's just fucking EVIL.

I'm so angry. Those poor children.

The reason I suggested complaining to the funding bodies and the local council was to make sure that those organisations cant hide behind a facade of deniability. In other words, they were told there was a breach and they then chose to ignore the reports. It should make them more accountable in the future. Hoping so anyway!

I'm pretty sure this can't be legal. It makes no sense. You can't use the exemptions under the EA to allow for only females then allow some males to apply. That would be discriminating against other males with no good reason. If you want to be 'inclusive' in this way you surely can't exclude as well.

QueenYnci, well, this has been my contention with the Girl Guides policy since that happened - all it would take is for a man to bring a case challenging the point that if you are using the single sex exemptions in equality law to exclude men, but you are waiving that for a specific subset of men you consider special, then you are being discriminatory against men as a sex class. I'm honestly quite surprised it's not been attempted.

Is it discriminatory to ask that only lesbians apply for example?

If this was for a lesbian magazine or a lesbian group or as a counsellor for lesbians who were also rape victims?

I think that would come under the heading of "positive action", but not sure if that applies to occupational requirements

Survivors Network have a long history of this. They make a thing of being inclusive of transwomen. It isn't a 'nice to have', it is central to their philosophy.

They and Brighton and Hove Council (who fund a lot of their services) have been publicly challenged numerous times. Not budging. The head of Equalities (A##a Spragg) is a biological woman but is totally immersed - take a look at her Linked in profile and recognise the usual suspects.

Brighton will be one of the last to fall, but there is a strong group of women calling it out. Please add your voices. BHCC and Survivors Network are misrepresenting the Equality Act and in doing so are putting women and girls at risk of physical and emotional harm.

I'm probably a bit off the mark, but I read it as only women can apply, but if your sex is male you can still apply as long as you identify as female

You're not off the mark at all.

Just to clarify the stuff about whether you can specify that only lesbians can apply. It's answered here:

www.xperthr.co.uk/faq/are-there-any-circumstances-in-which-an-employer-can-specify-for-example-the-required-race-gender-sexual-orientation-or-age-of-job-applicants/19538/

"Yes, there are certain defined exceptions in the Equality Act 2010, known as occupational requirements. These, broadly, apply when a job can be performed effectively only by someone with a particular protected characteristic, eg either a man or a woman, a person of a specific racial or religious group, a person of a particular sexual orientation, a disabled person or a person of a particular age group.

"To rely on the exception, the employer must show that, having regard to the nature or context of the work, having the particular protected characteristic is an occupational requirement and that the application of the requirement is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

"For example, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, in the Employment statutory code of practice, states that "a women's refuge which lawfully provides services to women only can apply a requirement for all members of its staff to be women".

I think they've got terribly mixed up with the law. They know they are able to advertise a post for women only because of the type of role. But they are scared because of the misinformation about the law around gender and so don't want accusations of bigotry.

It's perfectly acceptable for only females to be considered for this role. They are idiots.

Thanks RoyalCorgi. As a member of a specific sexual orientation lesbian only services are legal. I wonder whether the same objection could be mounted if "lesbian" was taken to include heterosexual males?