Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

FPFW: ONS concede defeat!

316 replies

PandorasMailbox · 17/03/2021 07:09

"We did it. We won. ONS have conceded defeat and will pay our legal costs.The High Court has now sealed the court order that sex in census cannot be self-identified.

Please share the news!"

fairplayforwomen.com/fair-play-for-women-wins-high-court-challenge-against-ons-census/?fbclid=IwAR0tJbErXe1wtBvuwZeNfyqs71OGlGvXQIoERD5FeBGyzoWmCz7DpkbXlT0

Fantastic news Smile

OP posts:
bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg · 17/03/2021 21:32

@WendyTestaburger

Gosh look at us evil feminists. Celebrating a win that will....

.... record accurate data for trans people as well as for women, helping ensure vital services can be planned.

I know! They keep whining on about the waiting lists for the gender clinics (because apparently no one else waits over a year for medical treatments Hmm) but then don't want to give the data in the census that will allow those clinics to be appropriately resourced. It's almost like they don't actually want to make trans people's lives materially better and are just looking for ways to hurt women.
EwwSprouts · 17/03/2021 21:36

"ONS backs down" nice! Haven't read full article as paywall.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/17/ons-backs-sex-census-legal-dispute/

Great news. Thank you to all.

gardenbird48 · 17/03/2021 21:42

Just seen on twitter:

Just had a very interesting conversation with the ONS- they are investigating 3 TRAs for fraudulently filling in the sex question on the census and inciting others to do the same.
They are escalating my complaint immediately

I think there are plenty of screenshots - people like Paris Lees, Mermaids, Shon, the usual crowd - I wonder what the ONS can or will do about this....

Clymene · 17/03/2021 22:01

Stonewall no longer meets the public benefit requirements of a charity. Unfortunately the Charity Commission is an absolutely toothless organisation that seems incapable of stripping an organisation of charitable status.

The public benefit requirement for a charity states (my bolding):

For an organisation to be a charity, each of its purposes must be for the public benefit. The Charities Act 2011 calls this the ‘public benefit requirement’.

The public benefit requirement has two aspects:
The ‘benefit aspect’

To satisfy this aspect:

a purpose must be beneficial - this must be in a way that is identifiable and capable of being proved by evidence where necessary and which is not based on personal views
<strong>any detriment or harm that results from the purpose (to people, property or the environment) must not outweigh the benefit - this is also based on evidence and not on personal views</strong>

The ‘public aspect’

To satisfy this aspect the purpose must:

benefit the public in general, or <strong>a sufficient section of the public - what is a ‘sufficient section of the public’ varies from purpose to purpose</strong>
not give rise to more than incidental personal benefit - personal benefit is ‘incidental’ where (having regard both to its nature and to its amount) it is a necessary result or by-product of carrying out the purpose
Alternista · 17/03/2021 22:06

This is amazing news, it’s made me well up. Thank you so much FPFW.

It does nobody any good to collect data that isn’t factually correct- not women, not trans people, not anyone. This is a great achievement.

ScoobyCat · 17/03/2021 22:13

“This case establishes that sex is a distinct concept in law, not something shaped by how a person feels and that organisations need not worry about asking people their sex when they need to do so"

This is so important. And wouldn’t have happened without FPFW. Thank you @DoctorW for everything you do, you amazing woman !

This time last year there was a huge push on social media trying to belittle and bully and ban anyone GC, mostly because it was becoming obvious that more and more people were actually thinking about the impact of allowing people to self identify into a sex category, and the sheer numbers of women who have managed to get sunlight on what’s been happening, who have challenged organisations to ensure they are applying the law correctly, who share the stories of others, and who are always pushing back against the patriarchy is just incredible.

And I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that it’s largely down to the conversations that have taken /are taking place on this board, so cheers to all of you wonderful women of FWR!

Hibari · 17/03/2021 22:19

What a waste of time, resources and human energy.

ErrolTheDragon · 17/03/2021 22:22

@Hibari

What a waste of time, resources and human energy.
Well, yes. The issue should never have arisen in the first place.
HeraNow · 17/03/2021 22:26

Apologies if this is slightly off topic. Is there guidance on how to answer the gender question? I haven’t seen the exact phrasing of it so if someone could advise, I’d be very grateful.

OvaHere · 17/03/2021 22:33

@HeraNow

Apologies if this is slightly off topic. Is there guidance on how to answer the gender question? I haven’t seen the exact phrasing of it so if someone could advise, I’d be very grateful.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4172134-Sex-in-the-Census-2021-website-launched-3-part-action-plan

The gender question is voluntary so you don't have to answer it all as far as I'm aware.

DdraigGoch · 17/03/2021 22:39

@StopSearching

What happens to all the forms that have already been completed?
In practice, people planning to self-ID would have done so whatever the guidance said. This victory is primarily symbolic and helps to set a legal precedent which will hopefully make other public bodies wake up before their time in court comes.
littlbrowndog · 17/03/2021 22:41

@Coffeeandcocopops

The judgement today gave me the courage to challenge a document at work where sexuality had been used rather than sex as a protected characteristic. I referred to the ONS decision today and management agreed to change the wording.
Great work
CardinalLolzy · 17/03/2021 22:44

The ONS last made a submission to the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index during 2018. We do not hold a record of the submission due to staff changes since then.

ONS person, Year 2022: Hey, what happened to all that census data we collected last year? You know, everyone in England had to fill it out.
Other ONS person: Oh, that was Leslie's job, but he left 6 weeks ago, so guess we don't hold those records any more.

HeraNow · 17/03/2021 22:57

Thank you OvaHere.

From the FAQ: Question 27 asks “Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?”.

Is there ONS guidance to help me evaluate what gender I identify with? I understand it’s a voluntary question but I want to complete this in full and it is illegal to give incorrect answers. I’d quite like to know what my official, as advised by the ONS census, gender is. Or don’t the ONS define it either?

Clymene · 17/03/2021 23:21

@HeraNow

Thank you OvaHere.

From the FAQ: Question 27 asks “Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?”.

Is there ONS guidance to help me evaluate what gender I identify with? I understand it’s a voluntary question but I want to complete this in full and it is illegal to give incorrect answers. I’d quite like to know what my official, as advised by the ONS census, gender is. Or don’t the ONS define it either?

It's a stupid question so don't answer it. If you do, you will be counted in the gender identity gang.
stumbledin · 17/03/2021 23:46

HeraNow

Do not answer the gender question.

It is voluntary.

If you reply in any way you give substance to the idea that there is such a thing as gender.

Please ignore!

statsgeek1 · 17/03/2021 23:59

Imagine if nobody kicked up a stink in an effort to shove it to the trans people.Trans women would have ticked female as they have done for decades, trans men would have ticked male as they have done for decades and the NHS would have used the number of GP/other professional referrals to the woefully inadequate GIC system to try and inform their funding decisions in this field. Dr's in both medical and surgical fields would have been able to carry on having grown up confidential conversations about their patients previous medical histories and used that knowledge to inform their treatment protocols.

Even with revised guidance, most trans people will fill it out how they see fit, if at all (it's on the prosecution to prove otherwise) and if you think the CPS have the funds to chase someone for a misplaced tick you are likely living in la la land.

It seems FPFW are no closer to having sex at birth as the ultimate definition of how we should be treated in law than they were four years ago. I suppose at least they have a hundred thousand in the bank to fight another day. It's a shame various refuges can't say the same but given Tory austerity, certainly not a surprise.

miri1985 · 18/03/2021 00:27

Congrats to FPFW and all who donated!

Wondering what this will mean for AWS given that it has now been ruled that sex is determined by birth cert or GRC only?

OvaHere · 18/03/2021 00:30

It's a shame various refuges can't say the same

Imagine if transactivists hadn't targeted a rape refuge in Vancouver relentlessly for years, depriving them of funds, targeting the vulnerable women there, nailing a dead rat to the door and just this week getting a crowdfunder worth thousands of pounds taken down out of spite.

Don't bother trying to take the moral high ground. This war was brought to women not the other way around.

PurpleHoodie · 18/03/2021 00:35

Excellent question miri.

PurpleHoodie · 18/03/2021 00:36

Does this dummy belong to anyone?

I've just tripped over it. Someone must have spat it out.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/03/2021 00:36

What a waste of time, resources and human energy.

Quite. I'm not sure why the ONS thought it was justified to waste so much taxpayers' money in a futile attempt to defend Stonewall Law.

PurpleHoodie · 18/03/2021 00:40

Mmm. Hmm. Yes. What Eresh said.

statsgeek1 · 18/03/2021 00:53

OvaHere

'Imagine if transactivists hadn't targeted a rape refuge in Vancouver relentlessly for years, depriving them of funds, targeting the vulnerable women there, nailing a dead rat to the door and just this week getting a crowdfunder worth thousands of pounds taken down out of spite.

Don't bother trying to take the moral high ground. This war was brought to women not the other way around.'

If a few people in Canada were representative of a couple of hundred thousand people in the UK, you'd have a point. Sadly, the ruling Tory party have stripped vital funding from refuges, both trans and non trans inclusive for almost ten years. If you're willing to join them in a deflection that would shame most tin pot dictators by blaming the few trans folk who use them today then there is little more I can say.

There's no moral high ground to be had in the safety of vulnerable people.

DdraigGoch · 18/03/2021 01:18

@Hibari

What a waste of time, resources and human energy.
Just how much is all of this costing the Government? Never mind just this case, think of all of those departments paying Stonewall to be on their list, plus the admin costs incurred in compiling the submissions.

Next time that I hear someone moaning that budget cuts mean that the state can no longer do x, y, or z; I shall check to see if that organisation is on Stonewall's list. I can then suggest a way in which said police force can afford to investigate a burglary or the health service can afford bursaries.