“Transwomen should be able to strip search women if they have a GRC”

[SidewaysOtter]

Chris Philp, the policing minister says that transwomen should “only” be able to strip search women if they have a GRC: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-gender-police-officers-strip-search-id-xfvwsdjgn

On one hand, it stops the self-identified transwomen but NO man - and transwomen ARE biologically male - should be involved in the strip search of a woman. A GRC does not change their biological sex. And any transwoman who insists on a “right” to strip search women raises more red flags than a communist rally.

Mr Philip can be tweeted at @CPhilpOfficial, if anyone else wants to make their feelings known.

There's a powerful twitterX thread about the dire state (lack of) of BBC reporting of this issue. The writer highlights how the 2 journalists (called LGBT / identity Stonewall shills correspondent and dedicated producer (luxury) to cover ‘identity’ issues were retained, while a number of other posts were cut.

Given the current fast moving pace of change / issues Josh Parry & Lauren Moss appear to have filed remarkably few pieces and none of them would qualify as "investigative journalism". Well worth a read.

https://twitter.com/leng_cath/status/1745332630441087309

Transpeople have been murdered in the UK

One "transperson" has been murdered. And it was determined in court that it was not because they were trans. How many women have been murdered by men in the last five years? BECAUSE they were women.

No idea, but you can guarentee that if there is just one in a force then they'll be the one assigned to the task.

The WRN report says:

'The policy paper made it clear that anyone who objects to being searched by a member of the opposite sex, and any officer refusing to carry out such a search, may be the subject of a hate crime or a noncrime hate incident if this is based on “discriminatory views”'.

'Some of the more notable responses: Avon and Somerset – while a woman objecting to a search would find herself having a crime recorded if her refusal was deemed to be based on “discriminatory views”, a person identifying as undergoing gender reassignment or in the process of “transitioning” would be asked “which gender they feel most comfortable being searched by”

'Leicestershire – displayed a sensitivity and concern towards any “trans or non-binary detainee” in custody, being asked what “gendered officer/staff” they would prefer to be searched by. However, this was not extended to any other detainee, who would instead be challenged if they raised any concern to the officer searching them: “If the detainee objects to being searched by an officer/staff member, based on the detainee’s perception that the officer is trans, then this should be challenged, and if the circumstances amount to it, then the incident is to be recorded as a hate incident”. Any such person would also be questioned in a police interview.'

So the institutionally sexist police, who are very keen to implement policy allowing male officers to sexually assault women, and who seem to think hurting a man's feelings on the internet is a 'hate crime' will get to decide if a woman saying 'no' to a man is discrimination. They can use the threat of hate crime or a non-crime hate incident to coerce women to consent.

Also, it seems likely to me that males arrested, and just being awkward, difficult sods, would claim to be trans in the custody suite as a way to get out of being searched, delaying tactics etc. How exactly are police going to deal with that?

Anecdotally - can't name sources, I've seen it shared here, may have been MNetters who are police - I have heard of smirking men insisting on being searched by women because they identify as women. And women officers have had to. With a man very obviously using them. Which is abusive.

It has been discussed that a large male cop needs to announce he is gender fluid and identifies today as Susan, and to do the search. I have also heard of women officers searching waist up for men with breasts while male officers search waist down.

It is a mess. But the main focus is that women are not forced to search or be searched in a way that would not normally be acceptable or allowed, because of a requirement that they pretend that the man's wishes change reality.

I guess until it happens to someone high profile we wont know. My best guess is yes, you'll be held down. Making the whole process 7 million times harder and I can see PTSD rates increasing alongside rates of strip searches.

This.

The genie left the bottle some time ago. Whose wishes did it grant? And now Chris Philip has sounded the dog whistle for every pervert in our institutions and beyond to get their ducks in a row before the next GE.

Can you see what it is yet?

The answer to this is that the police can use force to carry out a search if they choose to.
Although, the policy itself recommends allocating another officer to ‘de-escalate’ if a woman objects. Still could end up being investigated for a ‘crime’ or have a non crime hate incident recorded though

Of course women will be held down, forcibly strip searched and sexually humiliated. Then they will use the legal process to punish disobedient women further. Just ask Dr Konstancja Duff.

EasternStandard · Yesterday 13:56

If a woman objects she could be up for a crime ie transphobia

I feel pretty sure that if a woman prisoner were to be subjected to such an awful circumstance, if she was prepared to complain and go to court, she'd have a good chance of winning, because of the proportionality part of the EA 201. Well, as long as a Ben Cooper-alike took it on.

Whether a woman who'd been arrested and so searched by a TW cop would be willing is probably a different matter. Most women (and men) who get arrested aren't confident, well educated middle class people, with the resources to get something to a court.

You'll probably get that deleted, skydog, but I'm not flaming you!

It's all been done quite quietly too? It's very concerning. We must all spread awareness and contact our MPs to keep it live.

Look that way 😖

I agree. It's a mess.

So are these the trans rights that they are fighting for under the LGBTQIA+ umbrella? Because that's telling isn't it.

This not about the single sex exemptions that apply to services under the Equality Act 2010.

It is about the Gender Reassignment Act and employment law. We already have a decision from the House of Lords (the predecessor to the Supreme Court) which confirms that transwomen with a GRC should be allowed to carry out intimate searches.

A v West Yorkshire Police

https://sex-matters.org/posts/case-law/a-v-west-yorkshire-police/

Just to add that I am just commenting on the legal position, not saying I am agreeing with it of course!

That’s useful, I wondered if a case had been taken to court

People are missing the impact of the GRA and what it means legally

Like you I’m against that but if a law is brought in there will obviously be outcomes like this

Oh I have just spotted a typo - I said Reassignment instead of Recognition. This is what happens when I post before having a coffee to wake me up!

What do you do if you're in the situation where an obviously male person comes in called Lisa, a 'female' officer and says that she is going to strip search you

Do you say, I want a biological female officer please?

And she says I am a female officer and this goes to and fro?

What then

I am an agender female. I share neither sex nor gender with a trans woman so there's no reason a trans woman is more appropriate to search me than any other male.

I wonder if my gender identity would be respected, or if I'd be told I am in fact a woman and therefore made fair game for men who have such sexist ideas about women they think having certain thoughts makes them the same as us.