Vowed to resist

The ferocious determination to drive a tank through women’s rights continues.

Eight major trade unions representing millions of workers and students have vowed to resist new guidance on access to single-sex facilities based on biological sex.

The unions, which have a combined 3.6 million paying members, have criticised guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) following last year’s landmark Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of a woman.

Unison, the UK’s largest union with around 1.3 million members, has pledged to “fight” employers over policies it believes exclude transgender people.

It believes “exclude transgender people” from what?

Not from everything. Not from the world, not from life, not from mixed-sex spaces or jobs or prizes or organizations or clubs or sports. Not, in fact, exclude trans people from anything: the exclusion is solely from single-sex spaces, jobs, organizations, facilities, sports and so on if and only if they are the opposite of the single sex in question. That’s it, that’s the exclusion: the same one it’s always been. The whole point of having X for women is that women need it, so it’s a punch in the face of women to let some men have it provided they claim to be women.

But because trans ideologues have had such success in manipulating language to veil this fact, the argument goes on and on and on and on.

Unison, the UK’s largest union with around 1.3 million members, has pledged to “fight” employers over policies it believes exclude transgender people.

General secretary Ms Andrea Egan said more than 600 members had contacted the union with examples of what they claimed were problems caused by the updated guidance.

Now let’s talk about problems caused by ignoring the guidance.

Ms Egan added that she would work with Unison’s equality teams to “take the fight to every workplace to make them trans inclusive”.

By which she means make them no longer single-sex. What a disgusting thing to do.

NUS vice-president for liberation and equality Avery Greatorex accused the EHRC’s legal advice of being ideologically motivated and encouraged activists to oppose what they described as “trans-exclusionary policies”.

Ahhhh ideologically motivated is it – and legal advice that says men don’t get to barge into women’s spaces is not ideologically motivated? We’re the ones with the weird destructive ideology while claiming that some men are women is ideology-free?

Several other major unions have also criticised the guidance, including Unite, GMB, the British Medical Association and the University and College Union. Equity and the Public and Commercial Services union have also intervened.

The BMA. Yeesh.

BMA deputy chair Ms Emma Runswick told The Times that doctors wanted to provide care to patients of all gender identities, but warned the new guidance could prove difficult to apply across NHS services.

She said many services were already “ill-equipped to provide safe and dignified care for trans patients”.

Therefore those services should be allowed to demolish safe and dignified care for women? Is that her claim?

The guidance has also prompted changes from employers. Last week, the Co-operative Group watered down its trans-inclusive toilet policy, meaning employees are no longer instructed to use facilities they “feel safest in”.

That’s because the toilet policy that provides single-sex facilities is not about being “trans-inclusive” but being safe for women. Toilets are not supposed to be “inclusive” in the sense of letting men use the ones for women. The whole point of having separate toilets for women and men is to prevent that rather than allow it.

Unison said it was complying with the Supreme Court judgment and a recent ruling by the certification officer, while maintaining its position that “trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary identities are valid”.

But it’s not about a “position”. It’s about reality. You can have a “position” on the subject all you like but men are still not going to be the ones who gestate all the new humans.

The union said it would campaign for a change in the law to reflect its policy, claiming the impact of the ruling and guidance on trans, non-binary and gender-diverse members had been “devastating”.

In other words they don’t like it. Too bad. They should never have been encouraged to think sex is like a costume you can put on and take off at will. Men can’t be women, end of story.