Women only Cambridge college Newnham welcome men who ID as trans

[YouCantProveIt]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15249729/All-female-Cambridge-college-defies-Supreme-Court-ruling.html

As usual, it's worth going to the source. EA2010 Section 13(4):

If the protected characteristic is marriage and civil partnership, this section applies to a contravention of Part 5 (work) only if the treatment is because it is B who is married or a civil partner.

This solves several mysteries. It makes it clear that in an employment context only, a single employee is not protected against discrimination on the grounds of marital status. In every other context they are, including discrimination by perception and by association.

This may have been what Atkins had in mind, but if so, she conflated discrimination in general, with discrimination at work. That's perhaps understandable, but still an error. The same applies to your magazine article, which is written from an employment perspective.

More widely - other than the statutory exceptions, of which disability (as I wrote earlier) is one, and now - and I thank you for drawing my attention to it - marital status in a work context (age is the third one treated somewhat differently) direct discrimination against someone for not having a PC is still "because of" a PC, and so still unlawful.

Um, having a few blokes over to individual dorm rooms & common areas who are accompanied, need to sign in & are identifiable/trackable is hardly the same as uncontrolled thousands all over the place.

Newnham students are not educated only - or even mostly - in the company of women. Lectures take place outside college. Supervisions are usually outside college. Social life ditto.

Please have the grace to admit that you know nothing about Cambridge.

That’s nonsense; Newnham is pretty much as much of a mixed experience as anywhere else in Cambridge. Students use all the central university facilities, lectures are in departments with everyone else, the college is full of men (porters, catering staff, non-academic staff, gardeners, chefs, supervisors); the college cafe is open to anyone coming in off the street, and the loos are all unisex single loos. Boyfriends and friends are wandering all over the place, at formal hall, in the Buttery, etc. - they don’t need to sign in. The only things that are mainly single sex are the accommodation (though boyfriends are always around), the Fellowship, and usually the college library, which is mainly open only to college members.

It’s dotty to think that a trans person needs to be there to be protected from men in any way.

Can we not misuse 'hate crime' statistics to leverage any male people into any female single sex provision please?

Hate crime, England and Wales, 2022 to 2023 second edition
Updated 2 November 2023

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023

This above is the source for the 11% increase

"sexual orientation hate crimes fell by 6%, to 24,102 offences, while transgender hate crimes increased by 11%, to 4,732 offences"
and
"Transgender identity hate crimes rose by 11% (from 4,262 to 4,732) over the same period, the highest number since the time series began in the year ending March 2012. Transgender issues have been heavily discussed by politicians, the media and on social media over the last year, which may have led to an increase in these offences, or more awareness in the police in the identification and recording of these crimes."

Notice it is very open to what those hate crimes might be. Just (as has been pointed out by others) Hate crime is defined as ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic.’ .

And also worth noting that the increase in raw numbers is 470.

Violence against the person is separated into a chart at figure 2.8.
Figure 2.8: Percentage of selected offences resulting in charge/summons, by hate crime strand, offences recorded in the year ending March 2023, England and Wales, 30 forces

The percentage there was rounded up to 2% (ie. less than 2%). This is compared to Race and Sexual orientation being 6% of the offences being for violence against the person. Religion was 5%. Disability was 1%.

This is the only attempt to break this data into violent crimes. Public order offences registered against transgender people was 3% and criminal damage and arson was also 3%.

This is good. Very little 'violence' was charged/summoned. This gets even clearer when you look at the definition for "violence against the person"
From this resource that explains this:

https://www.psni.police.uk/sites/default/files/2024-11/Police%20Recorded%20Crime%20User%20Guide.pdf

"Much of the violence against the person increase resulted from a widening of the offence coverage to include assaults with little or no physical injury and offences of harassment (again with no injury)."

However, lucky for us there is a very detailed listing of what is considered under this category on page 24 of that PDF. I think that it is very clear that 'Violence against the person' is not limited to physical violence at all.

-start-
VIOLENCE AGAINST THE PERSON
Violence against the person is grouped into five high-level categories – Homicide, Death or serious injury by unlawful driving, Violence with injury, Violence without injury and Stalking and Harassment.

Homicide
1 Murder
4.1 Manslaughter
4.10 Corporate manslaughter
Where an organisation is deemed responsible for a person’s death. This offence differs from the basic HOCR rule of recording based on the initial report to police and is only recorded once an inquest concludes with a verdict of unlawful killing or the PPS authorise a charge (or direct that it is not in the public interest to do so).
4.2 Infanticide
Applied to infants under 12 months killed by the mother while of disturbed mind.

Death or serious injury caused by unlawful driving
These offences differ from the basic HOCR rule of recording based on the initial report to police and are only recorded once the investigation confirms the offence is made out, ie a person is charged or PPS recommend prosecution.

4.4 Causing death or serious injury by dangerous driving
4.6 Causing death or serious injury by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs
4.8 Causing death or serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving
4.9 Causing death or serious injury by driving: unlicensed drivers etc
37.1 Causing death by aggravated vehicle taking
Violence with injury
2 Attempted murder
4.3 Intentional destruction of viable unborn child
4.7 Causing or allowing death of a child or vulnerable person

5D Assault with intent to cause serious harm

Includes offences of grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent and wounding with intent. These offences are recorded where there is clear evidence of a deliberate attempt to inflict serious bodily harm regardless of level of injury sustained.

5E Endangering life
This classification is additionally split within PSNI to provide a data series for explosives offences and firearms/ammunition offences.

8N Assault with injury
This classification is further split:

Grievous bodily harm or Wounding - where injury may result in permanent disability; more than minor permanent disfigurement; broken bones; fractured skull; compound fractures; substantial loss of blood; internal injury; lengthy treatment or serious psychiatric injury (based on expert evidence); and
shock (when accompanied by expert psychological evidence)
Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (AOABH) – injuries ranging from grazes, scratches and reddening of the skin to simple broken nose or broken finger. Also includes non-visible injury causing more than a passing moment of pain or discomfort which has an adverse impact on the victim.
Poisoning to aggrieve
Non-fatal strangulation - The Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 created the offence of ‘Non-fatal strangulation’, recording commenced 26th June 2023.

8P Racially or religiously-aggravated assault with injury
The legislation behind these racially or religiously-aggravated offences does not exist within Northern Ireland and therefore this classification does not apply. Records are instead classified to 8N Assault with injury and are included in the racist and faith/religion hate crime strands.
8S Assault with injury on a constable
Where a police officer was the victim of GBH/wounding with intent, GBH, Wounding or AOABH in the course of their duty.
8T Assault with injury on an emergency worker (other than a constable)
Within Northern Ireland these offences are classified to 8N Assault with injury (where the injury is minor) and 105A Assault without injury (where no injury has been sustained).24Violence without injury
3A Conspiracy to murder
3B Threats to kill
Where an individual fears that the offender’s threat is real and may be carried out.
11A Cruelty to children/young persons
13 Child abduction
14 Procuring illegal abortion
36 Kidnapping
104 Assault without injury on a constable
Where, in the course of their duty, a police officer was the victim of an assault where no injury was caused.
105A Assault without injury
Offences where, at the most, a feeling of touch or passing moment of pain is experienced by the victim.
Summary offences, closely associated with actual bodily harm (see classification 8N). Includes, amongs other offences, common assault and aggravated assault. From 1 April 2003 only includes assaults involving no injury, please note that this change was introduced a year earlier in England and Wales on 1 April 2002.
105B Racially or religiously-aggravated assault without injury
The legislation behind these racially or religiously-aggravated offences does not exist within Northern Ireland and therefore this classification does not apply. Records are instead classified to 105A Assault without injury and are included in the racist and faith/religion hate crime strands.
106 Modern slavery
Includes offences such as holding a person in slavery or servitude, requiring a person to perform forced or compulsory labour and arranging/facilitating travel of another person with a view to exploitation.
Stalking and harassment
8L Harassment
Harassment offences are those incidents where no other substantive notifiable offence exists, but when looked at as a course of conduct are likely to cause fear, alarm or distress. Within Northern Ireland this classification is further split into harassment and intimidation offences.
8M Racially or religiously-aggravated harassment
The legislation behind these racially or religiously-aggravated offences does not exist within Northern Ireland and therefore this classification does not apply. Records are instead classified to 105A Assault without injury and are included in the racist and faith/religion hate crime strands.
8Q Stalking
Stalking legislation was introduced in Northern Ireland on 27th April 2022, through the Protection from Stalking Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. Offences of “stalking” and of “threatening and abusive behaviour” are recorded from this date.
8R Malicious communications
The recording of malicious communications offences started for the first time in Northern Ireland from 1st April 2017. This classification also includes offences relating to 'revenge porn'; new legislation on disclosing private sexual photographs and film with intent to cause distress was introduced in June 2016.
8U Controlling or coercive behaviour
The Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (NI) 2021 introduced the “domestic abuse offence” within Northern Ireland on 21st February 2022, enabling the recording of abusive behaviour occurring on two or more occasions against an intimate partner, former partner or close family member, ie within the definition of domestic abuse used in Northern Ireland and where abusive behaviour includes controlling or coercive behaviour, psychological abuse, emotional abuse, financial abuse and economic abuse.
-end-

The following is a link to the ONS that lists the above for all of UK but without the extra detail:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/methodologies/userguidetocrimestatisticsforenglandandwales#appendix-1-recorded-crime-list

So, as suspected, a male person can report his spouse or ex- spouse for domestic abuse (ie. not accepting that transition, and using the correct sex pronouns) and this would also be coded as a 'hate crime - violence against the person.'

Tweets that someone doesn't like about themselves fall under malicious communication and can be recorded as a 'hate crime- violence against the person'.

It always pays to look in the data that is being posted to check exactly what it says and doesn't say.

If someone says directly or implies or infers anything about 'violent' hate crimes, always check the source, and drill down to any data given.

The college accommodation & supervision is for females only. That's part of the reason why it's designated as female. If there were no female only spaces it would hardly qualify as a female college. The female students are hardly at risk of sexual violence in classrooms or busy common areas of the university. Nor are employees likely to pose a risk. I don't believe for one second males can just saunter into dorm rooms & wander unimpeded without any kind of notification.

Exactly why would Sex Matters be so incensed if there was no exclusive female experience since their whole alleged raison d'etre is women's safety?

You're grasping at straws here.

Yup, sounds like a clear cut case of 'misgendering':

https://www.cps.gov.uk/london-north/news/teenagers-jailed-transphobic-attack-harrow

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/02/brianna-ghey-murderers-named-sentenced-to-life-in-prison

Of course one can attempt to minimise violent abuse via semantics to wash the blood off the hands of gender critical ideology but as has been explained multiple times reporting is not the same as offending.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/57310/html/

If it were, we wouldn't put any stock in the suggestion that women don't report 90% of their rapes.

By way of background: At Newnham men are allowed in student's rooms, including overnight (there are no 'dorm rooms' - that's an American thing). To leave at night though, males have to be escorted past the Porter's Lodge. What you believe is frankly neither here nor there.

Supervisions for first year's are generally in College; as your subjects get more specialized it''s likely that your supervisions are out of college.

It's an all-female college by virtue of the fact that "members" of College - are women. Membership of a college is a legal status within the University. You have to be a member of a college to qualify for a degree. Historically most colleges were male only. One by one they all went mixed-sex, the last was Magdalene in 1988. The two women-only colleges were New Hall and Newnham when I was an undergrad. New Hall is called something else now.

Women only colleges have a particular ethos and atmosphere. It's not the absence of men, but the fact that all men are outsiders, visitors to "female territory" and such like that makes it special. I imagine that's rather destroyed when some of the women are actually men.

Female-only colleges at Cambridge are not about safety, and women are safe at all colleges. So are people who identify as trans. The idea that trans-identifying men need to be in a female college because only while surrounded by females can they be kept safe is just ... bizarre.

Does it not occur to you that @bymyleftelbow may be better informed than you?

The college supervision is for females only

You keep using that word ... Supervisions are tutorials. They are organised by the director of studies using a pool of expertise from across the university, and very often take place in other colleges or in the supervisor's own home.

It's not about safety. I can assure you that the college system does not protect students from sexual violence. The continuing value of Newnham is that it is able to provide a nurturing environment for young women who - for one reason or another - need help adjusting to mixed-sex education. They will be supported by a female tutor and usually a female director of studies (depending on the subject). I don't see how that would help trans identifying male students, who may be better served in a mixed-sex college with specialist help.

"Does it not occur to you that ^ may be better informed than you?"^

It appears decidedly not according to the horses mouth:

"It is important to note, therefore, that colleges such as Newnham have a particular responsibility to transgender students, whose oppression within and without the University is inextricably tied to their gender. Any space advocating for the rights of women, or offering a space as respite from patriarchy, must acknowledge that trans women are more vulnerable to sexist violence & discrimination, due to which in the ways transphobia & misogyny intersect. This is known as transmisogyny."

Smoking gun:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/16843/pdf/

I mean, how clueless are gender critical 'feminists' on feminism that they don't even comprehend the most basic tenets about it?

I think the education exception they are relying upon has to be founded on - we need to make up numbers in a small cohort year / course that isn’t full etc.

It’s not carte blanche to say - men can come in is they have special paperwork. That is as another poster said - discriminatory to a group of men who don’t have special paperwork.

I would have to take a read of it. But I wonder how they intend to comply with single sex spaces (changing rooms, toilets etc).

I also wonder whether it would need to be a man who raises a claim for discrimination.

I read that approx 21,000 apply to Cambridge each year and only 3.000 get in. So surely that’s an angle for an aspiring male lawyer to raise an issue / get credibility…. 🤷‍♀️

I haven’t read the full thread but as they are men they get admitted since formerly single sex Newnham admits men. 🤣

Perhaps indirect discrimination as a female because they produce their GRC as a male but that isn’t considered valid paperwork. But they can of course produce their birth certificate showing they are female.

The rule seems to be as long as you show us any paperwork at all that you have been a lady / want to be a laydee we will let you in.

So really someone with best case is a bio male or indeed a bio male transitioning to female without any paperwork. It’s actually discriminating against men who don’t have female certificated sex documents.

All people are safer among women. We are safer for men and men who identify as trans.

Doesn’t mean we have to lose the benefits of our protected characteristic of sex to play ‘mother’ to a bunch of effeminate men who want to be women.

No one signed up for that task.

I guess it would be more helpful if any of this had any relevance. But it doesn’t.

Ginger men may be more likely to be bullied because of their coloring.

Doesn’t mean they need to hide in women only spaces.

We aren’t running around playing mother to men who fetishise the very fact of being a woman.

By this animal kingdom logic the weaker aren't entitled to societal protections. And that's exactly why gender criticals mercifully don't speak for all women even if they pretend they do…

@theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw and @MyAmpleSheep

You are both giving me an education here and I’m working my way through the arguments. Thank you for intelligent debate (even if you both disagree on the intelligence of each others contribution) 😆

And? That’s not women’s problem if men are attacking other men. I do assume you’re not including misgendering in the violent crimes lol. As I have said, if men are attacking other men for their gender presentation, that’s on men. Go take it up with men. Tell them to be more inclusive of men with a gender presentation. It’d be a much better use if your time than coming on here shouting at women wouldn’t it?

And yet another animal kingdom advocate who's spectacularly oblivious to how much women depend on the protections of the nanny state & by extension every other identity group they don't think they owe anything to…

Ignorance is bliss I suppose…

Tan. So you chose scolding? Why are you so afraid of going and telling men to do better? Is it because coming on an online forum scolding women is easier. Don’t forget to change your typing hand and antibac your keyboard and mouse. You don’t want wrist strain or any other disease.

Who says I don't? Do you seriously believe Feminism MN is the only show in town?

The thing is gender critical ideology mirrors MRA's in terms of perpetuating gender inequality. They both need to be told to do better…& I here for it. 😁

Do how exactly are feminists saying they want women only spaces “perpetuating gender inequality”? Do tell. And please, no ChatGPT.

Newnham said it best:

"It is important to note, therefore, that colleges such as Newnham have a particular responsibility to transgender students, whose oppression within and without the University is inextricably tied to their gender. Any space advocating for the rights of women, or offering a space as respite from patriarchy, must acknowledge that trans women are more vulnerable to sexist violence & discrimination, due to which in the ways transphobia & misogyny intersect. This is known as transmisogyny."

Obsessive jumping at trans predatory shadows misses the whole point of spaces for respite from patriarchy. We are all victims of patriarchy including cis men. That message kinda gets lost in the incessant focus on the trivial like trans loo etiquette.

So what makes you think they are feminists? And again, if men are vulnerable in male spaces, that’s on men. Not women. So go talk to your fellow men and sort it out. I suggest you use exactly the same tone and insults as you do on here. It’ll work wonders. They’ll soon see the error of their ways.

'We are all victims of patriarchy including cis men'

Therefore, all spaces must be mixed sex? Dont be silly.

Haven't you even heard of equity?

Males are the larger, stronger, more violent sex, and commit virtually all sex crimes. Women also have the reproductive burden to contend with.

Men fighting each other is not our problem to solve.