Impartial Civil Service? Hardly.

[Aesopfable]

It seems there is a political organisation within the civil service that acts in an autocratic way and has no democratic accountability. Yes it is trans but it should worry everyone.

twitter.com/OnlyObjectivity/status/1150371014888566784

Do you know how many campaigning groups get govt funding? Probably any one you can think of in one way or another.

This is true, the funding itself isn't an issue or a sign of undue influence. Although I do think that we should stop funding Stonewall now that it is so anti women's rights.

As for a:gender, iirc it has contributed as an advocacy org to studies and reports alongside other orgs like Mermaids, so it's not just an ordinary workplace social/support network.

What is interesting is the timing: it appears that intersex people were organising with trans people and cross-dressers in the civil service around the same time when some intersex orgs were issuing fairly strongly worded statements saying that they didn't want to work with trans advocacy orgs as the groups have very different needs and aims. It's a bit like Gires in that sense.

Some info on other staff networks
www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/civil-service-diversity-and-inclusion-awards-nominees-announced

They are internal awards Grief, not awards from external lobby groups who have a vested interest in the removal of the rights of women and girls.

Aim was to show variety of staff networks. Your comment further up thread.

I am no longer sure why I am still responding here. I was just inititally cross that there was an implication that having a staff network on a topic was inherently dodgy or perhaps only dodgy if it was covering certain topics.

In any case it really is quite common for lobby groups to do employer award schemes. It raises their profile a d supports employers to be more inclusive. It's a n important part of activism I would say. Mind do one for mental health. You get ones for being breast feeding friendly too (which the dept I know has).

Anyway will leave you to it. This has got too fraught for me. I honestly don't think there's anything sinster here.

My understanding is that representatives from a:gender were present at the Stonewall meetings when T was added to the LGB in 2015. The trans community is obviously a small world so it's perfectly understandable, but I don't think it's wrong to scrutinise these things under the current circumstances.

Fleagle I don't agree with the toilets issue or erasing women in the workplace but I wouldn't want to stop trans people advocating for inclusion in the workplace, which the civil service is. Yes, the civil service is impartial but they are also people and employees who deserve the same rights as other workplaces this includes networks to support them. They do include diabetes, all different faiths, BAME, women's network, menopause. The networks influence workplace policy because that's the point, advocate for their members needs. However, we do need to be fully aware of the trampling of others rights whilst advocating for a particular group and that is where there is not enough debate - the toilets and neutralising language to support women is an issue where the women's network needs to step up in my opinion.

@RozWatching

My understanding is that representatives from a:gender were present at the Stonewall meetings when T was added to the LGB in 2015. The trans community is obviously a small world so it's perfectly understandable, but I don't think it's wrong to scrutinise these things under the current circumstances.

Maybe that's the point really. Once you have these sorts of lobbying organisations involved, it can raise questions, even if things are fine. It would seem less likely to if it was a LLL award for good breastfeeding practice, but maybe we need to be cognisant of the potential problems even there.

Lobbying and lobby organisations are difficult to tease out from grass roots organisations, but the former we've seen can be seriously problematic in a lot of ways, not least in that they gain a kind of status for their cause that seems to weigh more heavily than the concerns of individuals.