A police force is putting biological men in women’s cells despite the Supreme Court ruling that transgender women aren’t legally women. The Telegraph has the story:
Staffordshire Police says its custody policy means “detainees may be placed in accommodation consistent with their gender identity”, the Telegraph can reveal.
That means biological men who identify as transgender women can be placed in women’s-only custody cells.
The force introduced the rules in the wake of last April’s Supreme Court ruling that sex in equality law refers to biological sex, which has been widely interpreted as meaning that biological men cannot use female single-sex facilities.
Its revised policies commit to allowing a person to self-identify their chosen gender.
Staffordshire Police has also been accused of providing “contradictory” guidance on whether an officer of the opposite sex can carry out strip searches. …
Documents released under freedom of information laws show that the force has updated its transgender searching policy and equality impact assessment custody policy in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling.
In the latter, the force notes that detainees are allowed “to self-identify their gender” and this “is respected in records”. The documents also say the force has an “explicit policy commitment to self-identification”.
It states that “male and female detainees are separated for safeguarding” but goes on to say that “where recognised, detainees may be placed in accommodation consistent with their gender identity”.
The document adds: “Non-binary detainees will be accommodated in the most appropriate location to ensure robust safeguarding.”
It adds that failure to do this could raise a “risk of inappropriate placement (e.g. housing a trans woman in male custody), creating safety risks including assault, bullying or harassment”.
Staff are expected to “uphold inclusive language” and will be given training on “respectful” pronoun use.
The updated trans searching policy states that “police searches, such as those which expose intimate body parts, should be carried out by police officers and staff of the same biological sex as the detained person”.
However, it goes on to say that if a person has a full Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) then they change sex, stating that for a trans woman “the person’s sex becomes that of a woman”.
When asked to clarify whether this meant that they would be therefore searched by a female officer, the force said that a GRC did not “automatically” determine search policy.
The policy sets out that trans people can request to be “searched by someone of their lived gender” as long as the detainee and officers agree.
Worth reading in full.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Why aren’t the female-to-male transsexuals begging to get into male spaces?
Oooohhh wait.
Biological men?
That’s the only type.
You can’t be a non-biological man.
You can be a delusional man but you are still a man.
Deranged is also a useful description depending on how difficult said people are.
Exactly. The phrase ‘biological man/woman’ is as pointless as calling boiling water ‘hot’, or saying that water is ‘wet’.
Are trans people not ‘biological’..??
Every living thing is biological. All humans are biological.
If someone doesn’t regard themselves as their birth sex, call them a ‘trans… [whatever]’. Everyone else is just ‘man’ or ‘woman’.
This proves that, sadly, a lot of organisations are going to choose to ignore the Supreme Court ruling knowing full well that unless an individual or group such as Sex Matters launches costly legal action against them they’ll get away with it. It’s inconceivable that civil servants or Ministers are going to do their job and actually try to enforce rules the vast majority of them don’t agree with.
Even if there is legal action against an organisation the courts will just say they have to change their policy and possibly award compensation e.g. if a woman is sexually assaulted by a cock in a frock in what should be a single sex space. The person who wrote the policy won’t be named and shamed for allowing it to happen let along end up in prison where they belong.
My understanding of the ruling was that it made it clear that if you so wished you could have single sex spaces. It didn’t mandate them.
It only says that ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 means biological sex, based on chromosomes and/or sex observed and recorded at birth.
Beyond that, here be monsters.
Indeed. I don’t think it means what many think it does.
Who is the PCC? Another woke globalist Tory?
Is that picture representative of Britain’s future police forces?
Little wonder so many opt for a life of crime.
In my county town hats with that exact colour of band are provided to traffic wardens/parking attendants by the borough council.
I thought cells in police stations were for single occupants only, therefore what does it matter if you’re male or female? I’m only going off of British TV programmes I’ve seen so I might be wrong. Or do they stick several people in together in some places, like on US TV programmes?