*New* trans-inclusive policy at Maths Society that contravenes SC ruling!

[Notanorthener]

Academic threatens to sue maths society over trans-inclusive policy

https://www.thetimes.com/article/254a2be5-f599-4953-983a-308fd1bbf359?shareToken=58fcee9d566e3e7305939838bc4763f0

So here’s an example of a society introducing a new policy, just last month, which allows trans people to use facilities of their choice. They don’t even have the excuse of it being an old policy and waiting for the new EHRC guidance because it’s all “so complicated” that others are using.

Unbelievable.

s

😂

They are saying trans people can use the facilities of their choice. They can't. The EA2010 and the SC judgement have said sex is biological and that transwomen are men and transmen women and that transwomen must use toilets etc that align with their sex (transmen can use women's facilities unless their appearance is so masculine it will cause alarm). So they're breaking the law by allowing trans people to choose.

Yes my bad - I clearly didn’t read properly!

The judgement noted:[8][41]
Just as the legal recognition of civil partnerships does not negate the right of a person to believe that marriage should only apply to heterosexual couples, becoming the acquired gender 'for all purposes' within the meaning of GRA does not negate a person's right to believe, like the claimant, that as a matter of biology a trans person is still their natal sex. Both beliefs may well be profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others, but they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society.

The summary went on to say:

This judgment does not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can 'misgender' trans persons with impunity. The Claimant, like everyone else, will continue to be subject to the prohibitions on discrimination and harassment under the [Equality Act].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forstater_v_Centre_for_Global_Development_Europe

What this excerpt of Forstater says is NOT that it is prohibited to use something else than "non preferred pronouns". It says that you cannot go dancing in front of your TIM colleague and chant "you're a he, you're a he, you're a he he he!" for no particular reason because that would be discrimination and harassment. And why would that be? Because you don't go dancing and chanting "you're a he" at your other male colleagues either.

But you may call them ALL "he" in a natural manner.

Misgendering can be part of a pattern of harassment or if it's done with malicious intent, as it can be considered abusive or insulting behaviour that causes alarm or distress. In a workplace, persistent and intentional misgendering can lead to disciplinary action under company policy or employment law, as it may constitute unlawful harassment or discrimination based on gender reassignment.

And refer to them as he to other people.

See the current court cases where judges have given express permission.

My Maths undergraduate course was 85% men. I see little has really changed, if you go by the proportion of female professors.

I can see how people attracted to the rigorous internal logic of the subject, based on well-defined principles, might be seduced by applying the same sort of reasoning to the messier and far less certain real world and comfortably buy into the superficially plausible arguments advanced by genderists, especially when they are not in the least incommoded by them. It’s also no secret that mathematics appeals to neurodiverse individuals with fairly rigid patterns of thinking.

Thank goodness for sensible, realistic clear thinkers like Dr Armstrong.

I agree there are differences in methodology in the Natural science which* *rely more on objective observation and controlled experiments to find patterns and laws where Social sciences deal with complex human behaviour and societies, making controlled experiments difficult or impossible. They rely more on inference, qualitative observation, and statistics, and must consider ethical and practical restrictions that natural sciences don't.

Scientific training emphasises logic and objective data, but social science involves interpreting subjective human experiences and a wider range of variables that can't be easily controlled or isolated.

A science major may find the quantitative aspects of social science (like statistics) more familiar, but they may struggle with the qualitative and interpretative methods if they haven't had training in them.

Conversely, someone from a social science background may have an easier time with the interpretative and qualitative methods but may find the highly quantitative methods of some natural sciences more challenging.

So it's no surprise there's a difference in understanding of complex human experiences.

Nothing complex about sex categories. There's only two and, in mammals, they're immutable.

Exactly.

It’s astonishing how many spurious arguments are dredged up to try to prove this isn’t factually accurate.

To be fair to my laid-back informant with LMS membership, he's only taking the default male view that if he ignores it hard enough, it will go away (cf. Andy Letton at Leonardo). As a mathematician, he thinks it's all nonsense, but he has to work with highly neurodivergent colleagues and students, some of whom are trans (and some of whom may change their preferred name/pronouns from one term to the next). In his view, if some youthful numpty in HR wants to get workplace brownie points by making a big statement on inclusion, then let them get on with it. It's no worse than the endless stream of drivel he used to get from UCU (until he ended his membership to make it stop). He will continue being kind and respectful to his trans colleagues/students, and he will continue thinking secretly that it's all nonsense.

I asked him what kind of toilet provision they have at their library/HQ, and he said he can't remember. 🙄

When pressed, he said he thinks John Armstrong is doing the right thing.

@Notanorthener “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

The people - women! - who will be most impacted will not be able to speak out because speaking out puts them in breach of the policy and they will have a fight on their hands, which they will win legally but only after a lot of pain and expense and ill feeling. Women need the support of the other members of their professional society. Unfortunately we have seen in other contexts that authorities are more likely to back down when faced by reasoned pushback from men than from women.

Could you possibly ask your disengaged friend as part of this male majority to politely inform the good Dr Barnes that the society got this wrong, both legally and ethically, and that the rest of the membership do not agree with it? That could make a big difference.

@Howseitgoin So it's no surprise there's a difference in understanding of complex human experiences.

We don't need to understand people's complex human experiences when we tell them which changing room to use, or which sport to compete in, or which domestic violence shelter would take them. If we did, then how many categories would we need? Infinite.

Sorry I think I @ -ed the wrong person - I meant @DustyWindowsills

It's unfair to expect to women to fight back alone against the aggressively neurodivergent. And I'm glad your friend agree with John Armstrong - but it would really help if he would tell Dr Barnes so!

He can still continue to be kind and respectful to this colleagues and students. The big problem for women is the implication that to complain at all about this mad policy is unkind and/or disrespectful.

It'd be nice if people put more thought into being kind and respectful to women.

I used to be fairly happy to use pronouns, however over time I think it’s become apparent that playing along is a bit of a thin edge of the wedge. Why can’t she use the ladies toilets? So now I wouldn’t use pronouns. I would refer to by name.

I’m glad he’s suing, I think we need ordinary people to call out these issues within organisations or everyone tiptoes around the sacred caste to avoid hurty feelings.Hopefully his actions embolden other members to stick head above the parapet.

(Name change for obvious reasons.)

I used to work at the LMS, though left long before gender madness. I note that what used to be the Women in Mathematics Committee is now 'Women and Diversity' and wonder if someone sitting on that Commitee was the impetus for this policy?

(So very different from when I first worked there over 20 years ago - mostly poshish male academics who drank sherry after Commitee meetings. It was certainly sexist on occasion back then!)

I rest my case…

I do what I can! It's a work in progress.

Here at MN we often talk about women's fear of putting one's head above the parapet. Men in academia and similar careers have much the same experience. The big difference is that they are not directly impacted, i.e. by infringement of rights, abuse from activists, etc.

Yeah, great argument. You've won me over.

Is the case in the room with you now?

Does anyone know of a crowd funder?
(I have Googled)

I wasn't meaning to diss your efforts, sorry. I was just being hopeful!

I understand that men worry too but this doesn't need a bold public statement or even detailed arguments about what's wrong. A few letters to the General Secretary from members who are concerned that the society might have introduced a "trans policy" that's illegal according the Equality Act 2010 and is that really such a good idea? Concern from members who have no skin in the game really helps.

It may lead to disciplinary action but as we have seen in the Sandie Peggy case, there has to be a meaningful, lawful case. In NHS Fife with its predisposition to the GI side, the internal disciplinary process found there was insufficient evidence to discipline Sandie despite her calling a man a man and telling him he shouldn’t be in the women’s CR - quite a bit stronger and more explicit than using the right/wrong pronouns. Almost all NHS Fife’s witnesses and their counsel “misgendered” Dr Upton and they don’t seem to have been disciplined.