How the City of London allowed the consultation on the ponds to be hijacked.

[GargoylesofBeelzebub]

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/how-the-city-of-london-allowed-the-consultation-on-the-ponds-to-be-hijacked/

As suspected the consultation does not reflect the views of the actual user base.

I wonder whether the verb "allowed" should be changed to "arranged" for greater veracity?

So straight people were in a minority of 38.9% of respondents and the City of London thinks this is a representative survey of users?! And that's before you even consider the actual number of respondents versus the number of annual users.

Do they think the public are dense?

Agree I think the word 'allowed' is a big, fat, whopping lie there.... the deck must always be stacked, as fairness and honesty and truth will might lead to the wrong answer.

There is a very touching belief amongst some sections of society (the policy-making parts of the middle class seem particularly prone) that, once something is 'proved' by a consultation or a scientific paper, everyone will just bow down and accept it as The Truth.

It's very tiresome.

I think the words "consultation" and "scientific paper" need to be in quotation marks here.

Isn't this the case when anyone looks behind the claims, alleged data provided by transactivists or organisations captured by them?
Inaccurate, economical with the truth and always biased in favour of men desperate to access unclothed women.

Note to self: Don't hire Tonic to conduct our research.

The survey was ridiculous. Out of about 8 options of which policy pool users favoured about 7 said "let trans people use all or some single-sex facilities that are not in line with their sex". It reminded me of a nagging four year old:
Can I please have an ice cream?
No.
What about a small one?
No.
What about one without chocolate?

No.
What about if I eat my veg for dinner, promised?
...

It had nothing to do with science.

We knew it would be a load of shite but I didn’t think it would be quite SO obvious. 🙄

“A clear majority (86%) of respondents said the ponds should continue to operate as trans‑inclusive spaces, with trans men using the Men’s Pond and trans women using the Ladies’ Pond.”

Sigh ...
they ignore the law.

They can not provide

¤ A some men and some special women Men's Pond
¤ A some women and some special men Ladies' Pond
¤ A mixed sex Pond

If they are paying consultants to reach a public sign off on that they are spending public money on something which they cant lawfully deliver. So a misuse of public funds.

As for the results.
Basic weighted benchmarking shows that the collected data provides no valuable information.

Aaaand knowly using flawed data to produce skewed results is unprofessional and imo a breach of their PSED.

Well especially since, as Man Friday showed, they do NOT allow any women not even the special ones into the men's pond.

(I am a cold water swimmer and at my pool there was a women with short hair wearing what looked like a neoprene binder with a he/him pronoun badge pinned to it a while back because god forbid anyone not know the special pronouns whilst swimming in 5° water.
Also a pair of speedos with Tradesman's Entrance stamped on the arse, so classy AF).

It doesn't matter what their consultation says, the law says no, following the law is not a choice, you can't have a show of hands about it, they can fix the results all they like, the result doesn't trump the law.

If I go out and murder someone and the coppers try to charge me I'll say, sorry, no, I consulted with me, myself and I, and the decision was in favour of ignoring the law that said I couldn't murder someone.

It's also increasingly funny. Pretty much anyone traipsing through a Humanities BA or Masters these days will have to do at least a module on quantitative research so ever-greater numbers have the wherewithall to say, "hang on, this Methodology section looks a bit rum".

So all three ponds will go mixed sex, then?

If they continue to ladies = women & TW, they break the law on direct discrimination.

If they say "oh, it's separated by gender, not sex, it's likely to be challenged on trade descriptions and indirect discrimination as no one has an objective description of what gender is.

If go for mixed sex, there will be an outcry on all sides, especially for the men.

They are screwed. They know it. They want to continue to fudge it.

Why does everyone make this very simple thing so hard?

It was very obvious during the last consultation they ran about the swimming on the heath - that consultation had questions designed to elicit favourable responses and they also dumped any responses they felt were not trans-friendly so City of London have previous at stacking the deck.

Exactly. After the shenanigans last time round, frankly I would have been flabbergasted if they'd NOT tried anything dodgy this time!

Is it Tonic doing the current Girl Guiding Survey?

Not everyone. Just some loud and ignorant people who either don’t understand science or would jump on a bandwagon containing a thousand venomous snakes if they thought it would prove how very snake friendly they are.

They want to justify the fact that they are breaking the law.

They know or should know this as women had been evicted from the Mens Pond by police but men are given free access to the "Ladies" Pond.

I’m curious to know how many men currently use the Women’s Pond, and how many women currently use the Men’s Pond. Probably impossible to find out other than by anecdote. Given the reaction to Man Friday, I wouldn’t be surprised if the result was that the Men’s Pond remained de facto single sex, while the Women’s Pond did not.