Calne Town Council row over 'crackers' gender debate

[IwantToRetire]

At Calne Town Council, Liberal Democrat councillor Aitch King - who is a queer non-binary person - put forward a proposal that would allow an alternative to the existing titles of Honorary Freeman and Honorary Freewoman for those who do not wish to use a gendered title.

A committee unanimously agreed to recommend to Full Council that the revised honours policy use inclusive, gender-neutral terminology, such as Person of Distinction or Honorary Citizen.

But Conservative Cllr Bobby Seymour has criticised the proposal as "crackers" and questioned whether such a change would be lawful.

"After the Supreme Court ruling, declaring there were only two sexes, you’d think that would have given it a rest by now.

“Sadly, the common sense that people are either male or female still appears to be controversial in the Liberal Democrats. It’s about time they stopped trying to eliminate single sex spaces which protect women and girls and erasing our own local history."

Some extracts from a much longer article at https://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/26540076.calne-town-council-row-crackers-gender-debate/

Assuming that a formal award is intended to be granted under Section 249(5) of the Local Government Act 1972, only the titles of "honorary freeman" or "honorary freewoman" are permitted by law (with the latter option being a 2010 addition - previously female awardees were also known as honorary freemen!). A "non-gendered" option is not currently provided for in the legislation.

If it was changed that recently then it can obviously be changed again.

Surely people should have a right not to be given an honour where the title directly relates to their sex when their sex is irrelevant?

If we want equality then this recognition of sex where sex is not relevant should be disappearing.

There are women who never thought they were anything but a woman who would not want to be called a Freewoman , in the same way many of us want to be titled " Chair" or even "Chairman" when we lead meetings.

If it was changed that recently then it can obviously be changed again.

Obviously it can be changed, but not by a local council - which is what they're proposing to do.

I don't see the problem with a request for the change.

The problem people are having is with the person who is asking.

If this was being asked for by a woman I think it would just have been discussed by the council and never have made the newspapers.

To link it with the protection of single sex spaces just makes some elements of the gender critical movement (which I support) seem unreasonable.

There are many women who would prefer their sex not to be linked with a title where their sex has nothing to do with the award of the title.

Changing to a single gender neutral term for all is the best long term strategy anyway, but only central government can pass that law. Honorary citizen has a good ring to it and freeman (or woman) doesn’t really make sense now

They're not making a request for a change to the competent authority. They (a committee of the council) are recommending that the full council do something outside its powers. It's pointless narcissistic posturing or inept or probably both.

This

The conservative councillor's response is bonkers. Unlawful to exclude gratuitous reference to sex in a role title!!! Perhaps nurses who are men should still be called 'male nurses', and police officers who are women should be WPCs.
See also 'firefighters' - plainly illegal to use this gender neutral title. There is presumably also some madness around not allowing the lady firefighters to wear skirts.

Non-issue, created by gender theory's muddying of the water.

Change for the sake of change is a waste of time and money, but if they're going to do it I think Honorary Comrade would be better, it will save having to go through this stupidly redundant club politics all over again next year.

I don't see it as unreasonable that somebody who wants this change should ask the council they serve on to discuss how it might be achieved.

This has only been reported because the person requesting it is conflicted about their sex. If it had been a woman, and many women would feel the same way, it's a non issue.

'freeman' and 'freewoman' are legal entities which acquire rights and duties. Where I live being a 'freeman' actually gives access to sheltered housing - and is a very specific (and ancient) term. Until the nineteenth century only freemen could become mayor (a position of actual authority and power until fairly recently). So changing these terms to suit a passing phase is liable to cause problems down the line.
Personally, I would have stuck with 'freeman' regardless of sex.

There's nothing wrong with the new options for these titles. Nothing to do with single sex spaces at all.

Knowing nothing about the history of the title then I’d probably be in favour of finding a one size fits all term for everyone rather than having 2 or 3 options based on sex or gender identity. I appreciate that others will feel differently tho because of tradition and the feeling of erasing culture so it’s not an easy one.

i dont like how this is conflated with single sex spaces in the OP quotes as it’s not at all the same issue.

The local council doesn't have the power to make this change.

I would support a further change to the 2010 edit that removes the title freeman and freewoman and awards the same ungendered title of honor to both men and women.

I would like at the same time to remove the sexism in knighthoods that give men the title of Sir and women the pantomime title Dame, and all other honours that are awarded differently to men and women should be likewise unified.

I earned the title of Dr and am glad that my title doesn't refer to my sex.

Sex is real, factual, based on biology and is sometimes important. It is not remotely important when honouring people for their outstanding contributions to society with special titles and awards like this, these should not be gendered.

An act of parliament is needed to make this change.

There seems to be a lot of whataboutery in reponse to this.

I couldn't care less how a Tory councillor or whoever it was made use of stupid language.

The point is this is nothing to do with commitment to equality. This is about a tiny minority of trans people demand that we all change so they dont have to address the fact that they are still the sex they were born.

And worst of all saying its okay because it is about avoiding saying this role or that is for male or female.

Obviously as a feminist forum I am sure most would want that.

But this isn't what this is about, and the idea that it is okay for TRAs to highjack "gender equality" issues to suit their outcomes, is gross.

Not that I am ignoring the valid points made by those who know, that this isn't even something that councils can deal with. Sad how easy it is for TRAs to bamboozle people.

Sad to see it on FWR.