Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Maya Forstater Profile picture
@MForstater
Jan 1, 2022 • 11 tweets • 6 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
Herts police ....the story so far

@HertsPolice
Have been promoting their special constables including Cherry seen here with sparkly green nails, jewellery and an unusual amount of makeup for a police officer Image
I posted about it with a link to their uniform policy

Herts police deleted the original post as can be seen here Image
I also posted this one. Red nails. Even more alarming amount of make up Image
Discussion ensued - some serious, some funny, but all with the same basic point: does Herts police allow some of its officers to break some of the rules some of the time?
ImageImageImageImage
Herts police responded that derogatory comments will not be tolerated and will be deleted Image
I posted that Herts police can't actually delete people's tweets ...🙄

They deleted their tweet Image
Herts police replaced the tweet with with one saying derogatory tweets will be reported (to whom..? 🤷‍♀️) Image
More discussion ensued. Including @WeAreFairCop reminding then about the recent judgment in Miller v College of Police ImageImageImageImage
Herts Police deleted that tweet Image
Qs:
- What is HP culture of safeguarding & anti-corruption like if it allows officers to flout rules?
- Are officers who raise issue internally told comments are "derogatory" & "won't be tolerated"?
- Why is HP social media run by people who think they can constrain legal speech?
I've put in a complaint, as has @WeAreFairCop . I will be requesting a meeting with @HertsPCC and the Chief Commissioner @HertsPolice

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Maya Forstater

Maya Forstater Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MForstater

Maya Forstater Profile picture
Jun 3
In the case of Peter Wilkins v @dstlmod there is a bit about a "threatening FOI" Image
Wilkins had requested disclosure of DSTL's strategy on gender identity and gender expression.

The request was refused because it was anonymous. Image
After the judgment I repeated the request Image
Read 7 tweets
Maya Forstater Profile picture
May 16
Just taking a look back at what Amnesty International said very confidently to the Gender Recognition Act reform consultation in 2018 (they were advocating for removing all safeguards and controls from getting a GRC)

Giving out more GRCs will not affect anyone else they said. Image
It would have no effect on the operation of the single and separate sex exceptions in the Equality Act. Image
None on the occupational requirements exceptions in the Equality Act. Image
Read 11 tweets
Maya Forstater Profile picture
May 16
There has been much sound and fury about the Supreme Court judgment and claims that it is very *difficult* to tell who should use which toilets.

Remember: this has always been the law.
Back in 2003 a group of transexual men sued a pub after it asked them not to use the ladies.

They were backed by the Equal Opportunities Commission.

They lost.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/n…Image
Then there was the case of Croft v Royal Mail.

Father of 3 Nicholas Simpson became Sarah Croft. He wanted to use the ladies at work. His employer said no.

He sued (again with support of EOC) and lost.

a-question-of-consent.net/2020/08/16/cro…Image
Image
Read 13 tweets
Maya Forstater Profile picture
May 11
This, by one of the Darlington nurses is heartbreaking (CW: CSA)

Women should not have to tell these stories to get the basic dignity that is their right under workplace health and safety law.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…
This is what we mean when we say sex matters. It is what the Supreme Court meant when they said you have to be clear about what the different groups are.

It's not a legal nicety. It's not complex. It's not difficult.

It's just basic respect for women's humanity, with common sense.Image
I am so angry at all the highly paid people failing to do their job, who would not see that it is abusive to allow men into women's changing rooms, toilets and showers.

And even now who are resisting implementing the law. @NotPostingMatt @NHSConfed Image
Read 7 tweets
Maya Forstater Profile picture
May 7
Minister @RhonddaBryant says “We are opposing the amendment and are not intending to introduce similar legislation.”

Let’s look at the knots he ties himself in

He says “data accuracy is important. That is equally true for any data used in a digital verification service.”

OK so your new law will enable people to prove their sex accurately then? 🤔
Bryant says “the government is already developing data standards on the monitoring of diversity information, including sex, via the Data Standards Authority.”

This is distraction.

Monitoring diversity information (which is about populations) is not the only reason why you want sex data.
Some times people want to make sure their sex is accurately recorded:

- For their own healthcare
- For social care
- For a job where sex matters
- For sport
- For safeguarding
- For use of single sex services
“the @StatsRegulation published updated guidance on collecting and reporting data and statistics about sex and gender identity last year, and all Govt Departments are now considering how best to address the recommendations of the Sullivan review, which we published.”

“That is the first reason why we will not be supporting this new clause or the amendment today.”
Read 10 tweets
Maya Forstater Profile picture
May 4
A 🧵about signs.

What do I mean by this sign excludes all men?

I mean the sign itself is discriminatory. Image
It says women only, which means no men.
It is lawful because the situation meets one or more of the “gateway conditions” for a lawful single sex service in the EqA, and it is a proportionate means to a legitimate aim.
Who does the sign discriminate against? 

Men directly.

What all of them?

Yes, because they are all excluded by the rule. Even the femmes, the crossdressers, the transwomen, the non-binaries and the gender fluids.
Read 31 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(