Male
Female.
2/14
Hi @scottishprisons @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
In the Equal Opportunities Monitoring section of your job application, you list sex as one of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
However...
1/14
cc @wornoutmumhack
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/14
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/14
5/14
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
6/14
'Gender' at birth is therefore a meaningless concept and 'gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.
7/14
8/14
9/14
10/14
11/14
12/14
13/14
Please respond.
https://t.co/RJAWJ1vJ6s
14/14
More from sexnotgender.info
Hi @lgbtys @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form in your job application asks, under the heading of 'GENDER', "How would you describe your gender identity?" with options...
https://t.co/JPJHYaLyYc
1/12
... with options:
Male
Female
Non-binary
Other Gender.
2/12
'Gender identity' and 'gender' are not protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and are not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/12
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/12
'Non-binary' and 'other' are not valid options for sex.
5/12
The Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form in your job application asks, under the heading of 'GENDER', "How would you describe your gender identity?" with options...
https://t.co/JPJHYaLyYc
1/12
... with options:
Male
Female
Non-binary
Other Gender.
2/12
'Gender identity' and 'gender' are not protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and are not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/12
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/12
'Non-binary' and 'other' are not valid options for sex.
5/12
Hi @BlackstoneChbrs @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equality & Diversity Monitoring form in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
However...
https://t.co/Did1oeP6tH
1/9
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/9
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/9
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes, concepts that I'm sure you would not wish to be associated with.
4/9
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.
5/9
The Equality & Diversity Monitoring form in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
However...
https://t.co/Did1oeP6tH
1/9
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/9
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/9
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes, concepts that I'm sure you would not wish to be associated with.
4/9
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.
5/9
Hi @HomesEngland @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal Opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male
Non Binary.
1/14
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/14
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/14
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes.
4/14
'Non Binary' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, is not defined in the Act and is not part of the protected characteristic of sex.
5/14
The Equal Opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male
Non Binary.
1/14
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/14
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/14
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes.
4/14
'Non Binary' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, is not defined in the Act and is not part of the protected characteristic of sex.
5/14
Hi @OpenUniversity @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal Opportunities Form in your job application correctly has sex in a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
However...
1/13
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female
Unknown
Undisclosed
Others
Prefer not to say.
2/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/13
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology - your other terms are not valid or incoherent.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/13
You then ask "Is your gender the one you were assigned at birth?"
'Gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes.
5/13
The Equal Opportunities Form in your job application correctly has sex in a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
However...
1/13
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female
Unknown
Undisclosed
Others
Prefer not to say.
2/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/13
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology - your other terms are not valid or incoherent.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/13
You then ask "Is your gender the one you were assigned at birth?"
'Gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.
'Gender' relies on demeaning, regressive stereotypical notions of societal roles for the two sexes.
5/13
Hi @JesusCollegeCam @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES MONITORING FORM in your job application correctly has sex in a list of protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010
However...
https://t.co/rZk1bAiooU
1/11
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male.
2/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/11
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/11
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.
5/11
The EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES MONITORING FORM in your job application correctly has sex in a list of protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010
However...
https://t.co/rZk1bAiooU
1/11
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male.
2/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/11
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
4/11
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.
5/11
More from Society
Okay, let's do this summary again since there seems to be a collective amnesia relating to Christian Abolitionism in America.
Here again is a summary of the Christian Abolitionists’ arguments against enslavers’ appeals to the Scripture: Thread
Here again is a summary of the Christian Abolitionists’ arguments against enslavers’ appeals to the Scripture: Thread
Slavery is not a sin. It is never outlawed by the Bible. Manstealing is but not slavery.
— micah (@laborersarefew) February 20, 2021
Murdering babies and sodomy are sins according the the Bible. YOU don't get to make up things as you go Dolly, neither do I or Malachi.
This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?
My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.
But what if that wasn't true?
Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.
The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!
I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.
My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.
But what if that wasn't true?
Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.
The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!
I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.
I appreciate his intellectual curiosity and effort. I have quibbles. But my big disappointment is there was no mention of unintended consequences, which we discussed and which are kind of THE core conservative concern on this issue.
— \U0001d682\U0001d68c\U0001d698\U0001d69d\U0001d69d \U0001d686\U0001d692\U0001d697\U0001d69c\U0001d691\U0001d692\U0001d699 (@swinshi) February 18, 2021
