Cambridge SU statement on the SC ruling

[darenotpeekovertheparapet]

Statement on Supreme Court Equality Act Ruling
We are greatly disappointed at the Supreme Court’s ruling last week. Trans, non-binary and gender-non-conforming people have always existed and will always exist, and their identities are valid irrespective of any court ruling.
Cambridge SU is committed to understanding, listening to, and amplifying trans voices. We will defend the human rights of all our members, and particularly, at this time of global uncertainty, of trans, non-binary, and gender-non-conforming people. We will be working to understand how we can best do this within the University and reaching out to other groups, including the NUS, in order to have a national impact.
If you or someone you know is feeling anxious, unsafe or struggling due to the current circumstances, you are not alone, and we would urge you to reach out for support. We have compiled a list of local, national and university support organisations below.
Trans rights are human rights; a denial of humanity for one is a denial of humanity for all.

Unless of course you are a woman under the SC definition in which case your rights and feelings are immaterial and the SU won't waste any time or effort in defending your rights or understanding your perspective.
I'm furious with myself that I don't feel able to openly challenge this.

But more prominently president of CUSU, which is a sabbatical role (hence the meeting overload to answer a previous poster).

It's important to a small minority and to most it's good that it exists and not more than that.

Because they are young and inexperienced.

And the prestige of being an Oxbridge Blue still holds importance in Academia and elsewhere.

I think you might be thinking of the Cambridge Union (the debating society) rather than the student union.

No I’m not.

Why are they all so fixated with existence and validity? We know TW exist and are valid (whatever that means). The point of dispute is whether they’re somehow women or are still men.

They’re really going to have to change the record. Without compulsion to rely on, they’re going to need sympathy.

Okay, well apart from Wes Streeting, I don’t think CUSU has produced many politicians, @Softleftpowerstance.

Funny how none of these SJWs ever declaim "Women exist and are valid". Probably because they take their mums for granted.

Because
.... are women ... followed by..
.........and what do we want...... chants
fail to create a positivity 🤷‍♀️

And Tbf the valid bit was added by the NonBinary record Execs.
NB A NB 👀🦧 valid 👀

The Students Union was certainly a non event for myself and friends 40 years ago. Only the activists bothered much.
Everyone else was studying or taking part in sport / music / course related societies / random stuff.
Even future politicians were more into the Cambridge Union (debating society).

100% this.

The whole stupid TRA edifice depends on the people TRAs insist are wrong about what makes them a man or a woman continuing to act in ways TRAs insist are not related to being a man or a woman so that the people TRAs support because they want to pretend they don't know what a man or a woman is have the expected social background to do their playacting in.

"Everything you believe about yourself, the spaces you think you need and the reasons you think they need them are all wrong and hateful, but please carry on behaving as if they are real anyway so that we can come in and use them. No you can't redefine yourself as being not-whatever-this-gender-thing is because for us to be who we say we are, you must be who we say you are too"

Intellect is no longer a necessary factor in debate ; thinking fashionably and clinging to the herd's opinions on an issue is all you need.

the here's view of an issue

While that's true, I still don't really get it. I really think that even if I were young and naive, I would prefer to be unfashionable than to display such monstrous stupidity. I would be utterly ashamed and embarrassed to put my name to such obvious crap (as with those dimwits who signed the open letter to Bridget Phillopson).

That statement certainly has all the buzzwords. No evidence they read the decision though.

Oh, how inspiring - Cambridge SU boldly condemns the Supreme Court for undermining equality, all while juggling its own collection of Equality Act lawsuits from students and staff. Truly, a masterclass in performative activism: speak loudly about justice, but maybe skip the part where you follow the law yourself.

Yes, Cambridge SU's senior management and trustees are facing multiple legal cases relating to serious breaches of the Equality Act.
So, this statement is a bit embarrassing.

Interesting, have you any details, if you can give any without outing anyone?

Well if they like breaching the Equality Act, surely it's true to form that they condemned the Supreme Court for upholding it.

Clowns.

Some of the issues are already public. On Thursday, May 30, 2024, Varsity published an investigative report into Cambridge SU under the headlines:

"Cambridge SU accused of racism, nepotism, and bullying by staff
Former and current staff members have claimed that there is ‘a deep-rooted culture of corruption in the SU’."

The Varsity report is available online - you can find it with a quick Google search. And it's just the tip of the iceberg.

The CEO at the time resigned when the legal tsunami against Cambridge SU began - her resignation is also a matter of public record. Currently, there are multiple, separate legal cases pending against the organisation.

Even if only one of the cases proceeds, it would still be historic - it would mark the first time Cambridge SU's senior management and trustees have ever been formally held to account in this way, let alone face multiple legal challenges at once.

Understandably, Cambridge SU is in damage control mode, especially since some of the students refused to sign NDAs.

Also David Lidington and Nick Forbes. But hardly a star-studded list.

You have to go back a century to find a Cambridge-educated Prime Minister (Stanley Baldwin). Since him, there have been 20 Prime Ministers, 14 of whom were at Oxford - and none who were at Cambridge.

If ‘trans people have always existed ‘, why can no one ever give an actual example from earlier than 20th Century? Many civilisations have castrated boys to serve as guards, palace officials and indeed singers; but they were always known as ‘eunuchs’ not as ‘women’. I suppose it is possible that there were many men being accepted/ passing for women, although that does argue against the commonality of male puberty and its effect on bodily size and shape. The same is true for women: although there are cases of female guérillas ceasing menstruation, no one seems to have thought they were ‘men’ . Before hormonal treatments, the idea of being ‘trans ‘ would have really been just that, an ‘idea’. So they could of course have existed in their minds, but with less physical visibility than currently.

if anyone says anything about Joan of Arc ( 🦟🦋) I shall make a small wax doll and find the dress making pins.

There are quite a few examples of women in history who pretended to be men in order to gain employment or claim rights not otherwise afforded to them bu society. I would not claim these as trans people, but more along the lines of committing civil disobedience in the face of unjust laws.

As for those who might be considered transgender in the modern sense, I visited a Burgundian town who claim this historical diplomat as having a "diverse gender identity" in the modern meaning.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevali%C3%A8re_d%27%C3%89on

Most students at the University of Cambridge have never heard of the Cambridge Students' Union (Cambridge SU).

The senior management of Cambridge SU prefer it that way, as it allows them to avoid scrutiny and accountability from eagle-eyed students.

The perception among students and academics at Cambridge is that Cambridge SU is run by an incompetent senior management team who would struggle to secure or retain jobs outside the students' union sector.

When students hear anything about Cambridge SU at all, it is often in the form of reports about the many scandals involving the senior management team.

The real training ground for aspiring politicians is the Cambridge Union - the debating society - not Cambridge SU.

Cambridge SU tends to attract students who want to take a gap year from their studies, earning minimum wage from the Cambridge SU while updating their CVs in the hope of launching careers with various organisations.

The elected student officers rarely achieve much during their term, as most of the funds that should support their campaign projects are instead diverted to pay the large salaries of the senior management team who hardly do anything except sit while waiting for the next meeting.

As someone here already said, the real work is done by the JCRs and MCRs of the University’s colleges - not by Cambridge SU.

Students are increasingly questioning why Cambridge SU continues to receive funding from the University and its colleges when it appears to contribute so little.

That money, many argue, could be better spent on supporting the University’s own student services rather than fund the lifestyles of the Cambridge SU management team.

Some senior University leaders are sympathetic to this view and have begun calling for a reassessment of the funding arrangements between Cambridge SU and the University - especially now that it has been reported that Cambridge SU has overspent its budget for consecutive years, with no clear explanation as to where the money has gone.

All of this is public knowledge.