Criteria
Listen, if you don’t believe that people can change sex, you can’t work for the police. It’s just that simple.
In emails seen by this newspaper, Norfolk Constabulary told a woman inquiring about a role in the force that the job “would not be suitable” for her because of her “gender critical” views.
After the candidate made clear that she did not think a person could physically transition to the opposite sex, another force in the South East said her views did not constitute “the behaviours expected” and an application “would be not successful”.
Belief that gender is as changeable as nationality or political party is mandatory now. You might be able to get a job cleaning toilets, but don’t bank on it.
The revelation came after a serving police officer of 16 years anonymously emailed internal recruitment teams at 26 forces that were advertising for future constables.
The female officer asked if her “gender critical” views would be “a barrier to my application?”
“I must point out that I am gender critical, which means that whilst I am firmly against abuse and discrimination to trans people, I do not believe you can change your biological sex,” she wrote.
She heard back from 14 forces, two of which told her the “Nope not you” thing.
After Norfolk Police advised that her views would “not be something we could uphold within the constabulary”, the woman challenged the response.
“My views on this topic do not mean I would act with intolerance or abuse, just as an atheist would be no less likely to be able to be respectful towards a person of religion,” she wrote. “If there were serving officers with these views (as I know that there are), would their employment be under threat?
A recruitment adviser invited her to hand over “details and any evidence” of officers who may share her views so they could be “investigated”.
And punished and fired and sent into exile.
Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for diversity and equality said: “The entire police service is bound by and must adhere to the Equality Act and the police Code of Ethics.”
The Equality Act says people are not allowed to believe that sex can’t be changed?
For information, the Act says;
“It is against the law to discriminate against someone because of:
age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage and civil partnership
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation”
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics
Only relevant where there is suspected discrimination on any of those grounds.
Righto, so not allowed to discriminate against someone because of gender reassignment. Fine. But if we’re going to refuse to hire police, or fire existing police, because they hold personal views or animus that they don’t act on…
There are going to be a lot of cops fired for their views on race, religion, gay rights, misogyny etc etc.
Alas, Rob, but they won’t be fired for such peccadilloes…
I can’t find the article now (I think it was in the Guardian), but there was one black university professor who was asked to assist in training police cadets to be more ‘sensitive’ where race was concerned, and asked the cadets to write brief essays on the delicate matter of race. The result was, perhaps predictably, horrendous, the cadets turning in mis-spelled and ungrammatical essays that said things like (I quote from memory): ‘black people come from poor countries where all they’ve done is pick bananas and coconuts, they’re stupid and not properly educated, and they ruin our country and take our jobs.’ The professor threw up his hands,and said he was not going to bother. It was pointless. He kept the essays despite the pleadings of higher members of the force.
Rob, just what I was thinking. Let’s see the full list, right? If there is a belief that all police officers must hold about gender, does that mean there are mandatory views of all the other protected characteristics in the Equality Act? Are coppers allowed to think that young people can be a bit reckless and impulsive? Can they be of the opinion that people ought to get married if they have children, or are they meant to be against it? Must they have a particular sexual orientation? Which religion are they meant to think is the right one? Where are they going to find all these people who have no opinions or thoughts on anything at all?
Oh wait, it’s just about gender. Carry on.
Looks like it might be the same Norfolk constabulary whose chief suggests they should back off on charging paedofiles because there are so many of them.
https://twitter.com/lascapigliata8/status/1294782766060572672
More than one commenter on a thread I saw which reported this earlier story said that this officer’s hard drive should be investigated immediately. I’d say that’s a good idea.
I think I’m going to see if I can get anyone fired who won’t agree that trans-otters are otters.
And not just gender–sex! It’s bad enough to say we all have to accept this article of faith. We all have to believe this article of faith which is demonstrably, empirically, obviously untrue.
One of those was her own force!
@#$&!
I don’t suppose an argument could be made that, because sex and gender are listed separately, the law has defined them as separate characteristics. Thus not believing a person can change sex would have nothing to do with respect of gender identity.
Yes, Ma’am, I recognize your gender identity is female, but I also have to list your sex, which is male.
Changing sex is easy, especially in the UK where being heterosexual is ipso facto highly suspicious. It’s changing nationality that is difficult – Lord liftin’ Jasus you should see the paper work required!!
If form-creators wish to be inclusive and also factual:
Sex: Male |__| Female |__|
Gender: Masculine |__| Feminine |__| Non-binary/Other |__|
There.
Tigger: From your keyboard to the Universe’s (figurative) ears.