Bristol City Council- trans Inclusion consultation results

[Chariothorses]

Seems the majority of Bristol people disagreed with the council's trans proposals and are against female only services being made mixed sex- but Bristol Council are doing it anyway. Males with a belief in 'gender identity' take priority over all the women excluded...
link here:
https://www.ask.bristol.gov.uk/trans-inclusion-and-gender-diversity-policy-consultation/news_feed/consultation-results

Yes, and was TWAW removed as ' a slogan' I wonder?

They had a consultation because it’s a required step in the process. But they had no intention of being influenced by it. Clearly.

Ah, should have rtft- no need to wonder. That is a really clear cut, concise way of demonstrating their bias then. Handy.

The data on pages 6 and 7 shows that, despite the sample being heavily weighted towards people who are not Straight / Heterosexual, overall 54% of people disagree or strongly disagree with the policy approach.

The author's analysis of this startling information is to 'wordify' the table telling us nothing that we can't already see in the table

Box ticking

What avenues exist to challenge this? With my limited knowledge of this area my first thought was judicial review, but GC cases haven't done very well in that arena, have they?

I am not a lawyer so don't know much about judicial reviews. It is often up to those excluded- eg victims of abuse- to take legal action individually- like brave Sarah in Brighton, excluded from rape support as she needs female only care.

I understand from muslim friends some are too scared of being reported to Prevent if they speak up about the continued exclusion of women from what used to be single sex spaces. Specifically in Bristol women's groups struggle to get council funding if they don't include males in what used to be female services , and the council already has examples of abused women and girls being unable to access care/ abuse support/ facilities as a result. They don't care. It is not about 'inclusion' or 'diversity'- they are happy for women to suffer, it is about enforcing the misogynistic demands of men who have a belief in gender, however much it distresses and excludes women.

I don't understand why MPs are not acting on a national level- ordinary people are so fed up of this.

I would have thought a complaint to the Council itself. When that has been dismissed, a resident can then go the the Local Authority Ombudsman.
That way is cheaper than legal action.

I've worked in local government and in my experience decisions are usually made prior to the analysis of the consultation responses. I think its a disgrace, but there we go.

It's strictly against the Gunning Principles and it leaves the council open to a legal challenge. It's not a legitimate consultation when the result is a fait accompli.

Don’t they have to publish an equality impact assessment?

the hatred of women is hard to watch

Yes. I was just re-reading the Equality Impact Assessment, and one thing that jumped out to me (and this has been discussed on MN before) was the much higher levels of trans numbers amongst BAME and immigrants.

There are significant differences in the extent to which people in Bristol have a gender identity which is different from their sex registered at birth, depending on their ethnicity – with disproportionately high levels of representation for people from Black and other minoritised (sic) ethnic backgrounds

And this is indeed the case: according to the figures, the percentage of people claiming a different gender identity is a mere 0.83% of the overall pop, but 2.65% for 'other ethnic groups'. Three times as many! But they don't draw the fairly obvious inference here that people for whom English is not a first language may have misunderstood the census questions (and you can't blame them). I guess they are more likely to be Muslim too, to be fair.
Another thing that jumped out was their data sources: Stonewall, Stonewall, Stonewall...

And Section 7.1 of the Policy, on Freedom of speech and expression: to paraphrase, yes, these pesky women's right are legal, just about, but we certainly don't approve, and they shouldn't go shouting about it. 😡

What absolute bullshit.

"Hi women, older people and religious minorities. We have listened to your concerns and decided, we don't care. We are going ahead with this policy even though more than half of the people who took the time to respond to our sham of a consultation strongly disagree with it."

Yep. We need some press attention on this.

Examples of ‘dog-whistle’ phrases which are not directed at an individual but at whole trans community which are toxic or exclusionary e.g., "adult human female”, “women's sex-based rights”, “XX chromosomes”, “#StandWithRowling”

Jesus effing Christ, these people need to be sacked.

This is shocking.

People who use internet as a platform for trans hostile views, although not targeting individuals, directly can indirectly impact staff and service users

challenging someone's right to be in a gendered space is also harassment/discrimination

They're also illiterate and either ignorant of the law or deliberately misrepresenting it.

Bristol City Council embrace male supremacism.

Vote for us, uterus havers! Nice front hole people don't want equality or rights, they just want to make real humans happy.

As a nonbinary person I often have anxiety about choosing which (gendered) toilet to use. I feel that neither option fits my presentation or gender, and I am worried about my safety whichever I use

Mate. It's just a toilet. It doesn't need to match your perception of yourself.

If you are worried about your safety then that should absolutely be addressed but then why are women's concerns about their own safety being dismissed?

Don't we all have an equal right to feel safe and comfortable?

If not, why not?

SHHH!

For God's sake don't tell them that uterus havers are allowed to vote!!!

Quite.

Either all voices, and anxieties and preferences and beliefs matter,

or fuck it, it's the place of your sex and that's the end of it, no one's feelings about it matter.

I will not be living in a country where some very important male people get pandered to with special treatment and care while trampling women as lesser beings whose inclusion and access and equality doesn't matter, with those women told they're subhuman and evil for daring to argue. There cannot be special loving choices of resource for self expression for some at the expense of any resource at all for others.

What the hell do you have to be smoking to think this is in any way ok?

*CheckingTheNumbers · Yesterday 18:26

I am not sure what conclusions can be drawn from this sort of survey.

That Bristol City Council don't give a shit about democracy and take great delight in pretending that a survey is representative and then ignoring the majority in any case, then misrepresenting the results, to force through their decision.

The bent scumbags.

And you're right, it is all about male people, because although we don't know whether the non binary person who made that comment is male or female, we know two things.

1. If they are male, they are not worried about their personal safety when using women's toilets because women are not a threat to them, and it is highly unlikely that they are at any particular risk using men's toilets either, especially in a woke city like Bristol. The risk of hearing someone say, "Oi, mate! This is the women's toilets. What are you doing in here?" is not a threat to your safety. It's the old, "men are afraid women will laugh at them, women are afraid men will kill them" chestnut, isn't it?
2. If they are female, they are not worried about their personal safety when using women's toilets because literally no one is ever going to question whether they should be in there, and they are almost certainly not using men's toilets, even on days when they feel more manly.

It's the "female" bit of adult human female that is supposedly "toxic", let's be clear.

Simply stating a sex is toxic. Do they realise how moronic they seem? I can't work out if the dishonesty or stupidity is worse. Actually, it's the lies by a mile.

It's becoming a standard feature of leftist politics.

They don't believe in democracy - Mandelson explained about the 'post democratic era'. They believe in forcibly doing unto the plebs for their good, as their superior knowledge and righteousness requires. And if you were a righteous and good person like them, you wouldn't argue about it. So you're a pleb who doesn't know any better and doesn't matter and should be made/punished into compliance.

It's colonialism.

It is exactly the kind of colonialism that the left bore eternally on about, and enjoy identifying as being horrified by. They're actually all for it, they'd have got on with the historical groups they like to criticise like a house on fire. It's exactly the kind of colonialism that trampled out indigenous people and made them 'be like better people' for their own good, and the kind of classist snobbery that made middle class committees remove children to punish women for perceived fecklessness and ship the children off to Australia to be abused, or sold babies into adoption while keeping women in slavery in laundries.

If it wasn't so horrific, it would be funny.

That's well made point, Frood

I don't understand how someone can say that even describing or talking about femaleness is "toxic" and not acknowledge that this is pure misogyny.