Disciplinary action for ONS female employees if they object to trans colleagues using their lavatories

[ChristinaXYZ]

This -

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/30/ons-female-employees-disciplinary-object-trans-toilets/

"Women working for the Office for National Statistics face disciplinary action if they object to male-born colleagues using single-sex lavatories and changing rooms, documents leaked to The Sunday Telegraph reveal.

A cache of HR policies, internal communications and posts from the ONS intranet show that the statistics body has been subject to “institutional capture” by trans activists, gender critical campaigners have alleged...

A set of ONS resources on “Gender Identity and Transitioning at Work” includes a manager’s checklist for supporting a transitioning employee with a section headed “use of single-sex facilities”.

It says: “Have you agreed when the employee will start to use single-sex facilities, such as toilets and changing rooms, appropriate to their acquired gender? This will usually be on the first day of transition.”

The document says that “if colleagues object to sharing facilities with employees going through transition, the situation should be dealt with through communication, discussion and education”.

“If colleagues persist with unreasonable objections you may need to manage the situation via grievance or disciplinary procedures.”"

Much more detail including a response from Sex Matters in the article linked above.

That seems very close to unanswerable logic. It could equally unanswerably be extended to any s xua l or violent offender: The hormone surges are what causes unfortunate humans to become unsafe to themselves and others, and to require removal from society. Society cannot afford to lock the whole lot of them up in cages for the rest of their lives.

There have been cases of apparently genuine regret over losing control. High testosterone levels are routinely seen in the (rare) female violent offenders, and higher than average levels in the exceptionally violent male ones. Some paedophiles don't really like the fact they are attracted to children, and have asked to have some kind of chemical castration, hoping that on release, they can spend the rest of their lives without any urges at all. (This, partly from concern over their inevitable future victims, and partly because for them, experiencing any sexual impulse at all can result in their own imprisonment.)

Set aside that men have always made laws, and such legislators have always had a knee-crossing horrified shudder at the thought of anyone tampering with dangly bits: a) It's a mistake to let the world be run on the lop-sided basis of excluding females from decision making. b) It's not, now, necessary to use surgery, to achieve hormonal control, or to achieve vasectomy, or to achieve administration of steady doses of drug regimes for mentally unbalanced and/ or hormonally unbalanced individuals.

Knife-free vasectomy is now normal practice. It would be surprising if a 'Viagra treatment- in- reverse', could not be achieved by similar micro-methods, or by implanted drugs. The decades of using long lasting implants of contraceptives for women must have provided a proof that implants for men could be an option. (The caveat is, that being unable to achieve erection is insufficient: Being unable to achieve any s xu l interest is the aim.)

Medicinal implants of all kinds should be the routine method of offering continuously-taken drugs, where there is a risk to self or others. Chemical castration, or correction of hormonal imbalance, would be obvious candidates. But also, drugs to deal with mental disturbance must be more sensibly given via implant than by expecting perfect memory and control and orderly life-planning, from exactly the patients known to have no such circumstances.

It is beyond absurd that prisoners are merely expected to take their own medicine to control violent mental illness, therefore they choose to refrain, and instead injure prison guards, until the end of their sentences means they get released to injure the general public.

Sadly, it is unlikely to work with any of them except those who do have a conscience.

There is plenty of evidence that paedophile, who through age or illness are unable to offend personally, still continue to procure victims for other paeddophile.

I'm sure that many of these men would do the same whether physically or chemically castrated. (But I'd still consider it money well spent)

The irony that the office of national statistics cannot distinguish between the terms sex and gender is not lost on me. It truly is a crying shame

It is here. www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/transgender-woman-raped-2-000-times-male-prison-a6989366.html

This is Brisbane, Australia not England. It is a failing of Australian prison services not to keep males safe from each other. Males can rape each other, regardless of how they identify.

Doesn't mean you place men in prison with women, that is insane. On top of rape, you would have babies born in prison and instead of 1 rape victim, you'd also be dealing with a secondary victim in the child.

I say again, males raping males in all male prison is a problem to be solved inside the prison. You don't transfer the problem to female prisons.

I don't think they can distinguish between "man" and "woman" either, it's all vague feelings.

God almighty. Could they shout any louder that OLD WOMEN DON’T MATTER?

Yes, I agree, thank you. That is why I suggest that removing the physical ability to rape is not enough on it's own, but has to be accompanied by a loss of ability to find any interest in s x. It is decades since I researched this, but there was even then a way to do it. The drugs were not without side effects, of feeling fairly lethargic and apathetic about life in general, in order to feel that way about the previous sexual triggers. (i.i.r.c.). However, the men involved had chosen it, and continued it, just as someone would take the drug to make themselves vomit if they took alcohol, or have all their income and assets taken over by someone they trust, in order to stop themselves gambling. In fact "loss of libido" is, it seems, a fairly common side effect of many drugs, for many purposes, including some for some types of mental ill health. Is this a result of a general flattening of mood, in order to remove extreme emotional swings?

Or play chess with à pigeon.

I suppose the answer to that idea is that I am not happy and other women cannot decide for me whether I want to share a changing room with a man - and I don't. He is the problem so remove him.

In my experience, "Bob" would get hard listening to you!

This can’t be legal can it? Forced changing your tampon or using the toilet with a male colleague in the next cubicle? No way
Unisex single toilets with their colleagues’ piss on them are bad enough. But it isn’t legal to allow workplaces to force women employees to either toilet with men, or not use the toilet at all all day, surely?

It isn't legal as everyone repeatedly points out. But this is the Office for National Staistics who beclowned themselves by screwing up census data of all things because they've been captured by transactivists imposing their batshit ideas and as a result asked a census question that was incoherent and not clearly understood. They even had to be taken to court by the awesome FPFW to stop them allowing self ID for the question about sex:
https://fairplayforwomen.com/fair-play-for-women-wins-high-court-challenge-against-ons

Yet they still managed to devise another flawed question:

https://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/article/flawed-census-question-leads-to-inaccurate-data-on-gender-identity

Given that they've allowed extreme transactivism to professionally screw up the one thing they're designed for, it's no surprise that they're doubling down and allowing men to bully women civil servants.

Surely this is just another expensive court case in the making for them?