Civil servants told women’s rights protests were anti-trans, leak shows

[Igneococcus]

Article int he Times. How did those outside groups become so embedded in the civil service and how do we end this influence?
https://www.thetimes.com/article/d422ac4a-a602-468d-bfb9-ad15575233de?shareToken=0a07285ff5515395f6cd79de007c7814

It's astonishing isn't it how the most oppressed group of people eveh in the whole history of everything managed to get their tentacles of influence into every institution and government body in the country

it's almost as if they were never powerless but a bunch of middle class middle aged men who had careers and contacts which they used ruthlessly to further their agenda

Yep, those poor wee souls, completely friendless and unsupported.
Are there other areas in the civil service where outside agencies have so much influence?

I was confused by the title, as I read the 'shows' as a noun and the 'leak' as an adjective, resulting in a wtf moment while I was trying to work out if a 'leak show' was a drag show mark 2 or something. All resolved now!

Many moons ago I was a civil servant and I can't begin to imagine any of us daring to behave as this bunch do. It all needs rooting out: make them re-apply for their jobs with interviews by properly grounded, non-paritsan interviewers. If you can find them.

So this email was sent from the cabinet office? But not by anyone working there? How does that work?

Archive version
archive.is/E9JlX

Indeed. It certainly raises some GDPR questions if it happened exactly like that:

Dear third party providers,

We are sharing all our staff's email addresses with you (in a file/via an API link) and would like you to contact them with an email where you communicate important information to them about a matter relating to discrimination law. We do not want to see the wording of this email before you send it.

Regards,

The Cabinet Office

Or.....

The third party provider created the email, passed it to the Cabinet Office who decided to then send it out to staff.

They need to decide whether they are accountable for a possible data protection law failure (first scenario), unless they can show why it is justiable to share this Personally Identifiable Information (PII) or if they are accountable for the content of the email that went out from them to their staff (second scenario). If they sent the email without checking what it said, they are still accountable for the content... It's simply an approval process failure, either due to lack of competence on the part of the approvers or human error on process.

I hope the Times keep digging about this as it speaks to the extent extreme transactivism sits at the heart of government. Given that they're demanding evryone breaks the law, that's as serious as it gets in a democracy.

Absolutely. There is soooooooo much to peel back that's hiding in that seemingly small sentence about the sending of the email.

I know some civil servants who spoke there and then saw their employer tell their colleagues they spoke at an anti trans event.

I believe the civil service sex equality network are trying to get a written apology.

Very like the male gay mafia in the City. Little to no consideration of other PC and disadvantages.

That's shocking but totally predictable. It showcases how transactivism is fuelled by bullying and intimidation. All in plain sight in our allegedly democratic society.

Separately, The Times has obtained materials from online meetings held by a:gender, a civil service staff network for trans and intersex people. The group is understood to have held online sessions across government department.

It is very good the Times has reported on this shocking element. Thank you for the reading link to the article.

As an aside, I wish The Times had clarified a:gender’s reference to ‘intersex people’ to let readers know that DSDs should not be used as part of a propaganda campaign to foster transactivist claims for people claiming to be in a special category of ‘non binary’.

I'd love to know the number of gay men or LGBTQ+ employees at the Cabinet Office. Years ago it was flooded with gay men.

You say that as if there is something inherently wrong with gay men, and that a certain number of them is a 'flood'.