How Stephen Became Stephanie – and other transgender tales
| Kindle eBook | Paperback |
 |
|
I am absolutely speechless, and in protest, I sat outside with my wife (also a full Labour Party member who joined after January 12th 2016). We wore gags over our mouths in protest. Thanks to the people who came along and protested with us.
PLEASE NOTE: THIS WAS A SILENT, PEACEFUL, DEMONSTRATION, WEARING A GAG OVER MOUTH IN PROTEST TO SHOW LABOUR PARTY FULL MEMBERS WHO JOINED AFTER 12TH JANUARY ARE BEING GAGGED AND CAN’T SPEAK OR VOTE IN THEIR OWN CLP’s ‘SUPPORTING NOMINATION MEETING’ – SEE BELOW.
If you are a Labour Party Registered Supporter, or full member after Jan. 12th and can’t get in to your CLP’s ‘Supporting Nomination’ meeting, MEET OUTSIDE as we did.
7:15, Friday 5th August 2016, St John with St Mark Church Hall, Parkinson Street Bury BL9 6NY – PEACEFUL & SILENT Demonstration, no intimidation, no abuse, ‘like Gandhi’. WEAR A GAG over mouth.
Our Labour Bury North CLP had a meeting as above, which they said we were ineligible to attend although we are full members and we paid the extra £25 ‘voting surcharge’ in the two-day window.
We are allowed to vote in the actual Leadership election (we think) but can’t attend our own CLP’s ‘Supporting Nomination Meeting’.
In my case this despite having paid £3 registered voter fee last year + full membership subscription + £15 subscription to LGBT Labour (an official ‘Affiliated Group’) + this £25 ‘new member voter surcharge’ – but because I was not a member before 12th January 2016 I am unable to attend or vote in the CLP’s ‘Supporting Nomination Meeting’ to nominate the Labour Leader!
The draconian and undemocratic eligibility criteria were as follows, as stated in emails from our Labour North West Region and our Bury North CLP Secretary:
From: Andy Smith <andy_smith@labour.org.uk>
Date: 28 July 2016 at 12:13:50 BST
Subject: Supporting Nomination for the Leader of the Labour Party
Dear Colleague,
CLP Supporting Nomination for the Leader of the Labour Party
Bury North CLP will be holding a meeting to give local members an opportunity to discuss the candidates and give consideration as to whether the CLP might wish to make a Nomination in favour of a Leadership candidate.
This letter is to advise you that this meeting will take place:
On Friday 5th August 2016 commencing at 7.30 p.m. the venue will be :
St John with St Mark Church Hall, Parkinson Street Bury BL9 6NY
According to our records you are eligible to take part in the meeting.
To take part in the Supporting Nomination meeting you will need to have been a member of the Labour Party on or before 12th January 2016 and not be in arrears.
Eligible members – Freeze Date (as per NEC decision):
Only those members who have been Party members on or before 12 January 2016 and are therefore eligible to vote in the ballot will be eligible to participate in the meeting.
Those members who are showing as being in arrears from after the Freeze Date, will be able to participate in the meeting provided they pay the arrears at the commencement of the meeting, or provide proof that they have since paid the arrears to the national Party.
No registered or affiliated supporters or non-eligible members can attend or be allowed entry to the meeting, unless they are also an eligible party member.
If you have any questions in regard to your eligibility to take part in the meeting you will need to contact John Smith 0161 761 3597
John Smith
Labour Party Bury North CLP Executive Secretary
(no email address?)
(I emailed Labour General Secretary Iain McNichol about the NEC’s recent decisions – but no reply so far – Kate.)
BURY NORTH CONSTITUENCY LABOUR PARTY
CLP SUPPORTING NOMINATION LABOUR LEADERSHIP 2016 – ELECTIONS FOR LEADER
- The Meeting will check the eligibility of all members attending.
- A discussion will take place on the qualities of the Nominees.
- No Member will be allowed to speak more than once and no contribution will exceed 3 minutes.
- This discussion period will not exceed 45 minutes.
- Following the discussion of Candidate qualities, the Meeting will move to a Ballot if such is agreed.
- If the Meeting decides not to make Supporting Nominations, then the Meeting will be closed.
- If a Ballot is agreed Tellers will be elected to undertake the Count.
- The Ballot, if one takes place will use a single round preferred voting system (as used in the final Ballot for a parliamentary candidate).
- The Count will be witnessed by the CLP Secretary and Chair.
- The Ballot result will be announced to the Meeting and the CLP Secretary will be instructed to fill out the Supporting Nomination Form and make arrangements for it to be returned to the Compliance Unit ahead of the deadline of 12 noon on Monday 15 August 2016.
This email has been sent out from Labour North West at the bequest of Bury North CLP.
Sent by email from the Labour Party, promoted by Iain McNicol on behalf of The Labour Party, both at Southside, 105 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 6QT Website: www.labour.org.uk to join or renew call 0345 092 2299.
My advice – HOLD A SILENT, PEACEFUL PROTEST. WEAR A GAG OUTSIDE ANY CLP MEETINGS THAT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ENTER. IF NOT ALREADY A MEMBER, JOIN LABOUR, AND HELP STOP THESE UNDEMOCRATIC PRACTICES.
#IDAHOT2016 Rainbow flag flying at #RNLI Headquarters Poole, Dorset pic.twitter.com/GBxUlPZVWZ
Posted on Twitter by RNLI Chief Executive Paul Boissier (@PaulBoissier) May 17, 2016
· The RNLI flew the Rainbow Flag outside their HQ on May 17th to celebrate #IDAHOT – INTERNATIONAL DAY AGAINST HOMOPHOBIA AND TRANSPHOBIA.
· They are also signed up as Stonewall Diversity Champions.
· This breathtaking hypocrisy is despite the complete whitewash and cover-up by RNLI HQ of a complaint about discrimination against trans woman Kate Mason, who has been fighting the RNLI for over a year after she was rejected as an Education Volunteer by the RNLI Burry Port Station (near Llanelli), on the grounds that “the ‘culture’ of the Station was too ‘macho’ to have a transgender person working with them and there would be ‘gossip’”. No other reason was given at the time for her rejection.
· Kate was rejected as a volunteer two weeks after bringing to the attention of the local RNLI management an incident at RNLI Burry Port in which she had been referred to in the wrong gender as ‘this gentleman’ – apparently as a joke at her expense to distinguish her from an RNLI dummy fully dressed in RNLI Boat Crew kit.
· Kate protested against her rejection to the local management, and then to RNLI HQ staff, including Chief Executive Paul Boissier, but Kate and her wife were treated as if they were liars and no action was taken against the local RNLI management. Kate was told that ‘the matter is closed’.
· Seven weeks later the RNLI’s ‘People & Transformation Director, Heidi Allen, concocted a spurious and untruthful excuse for Kate’s rejection as an Education Volunteer on the grounds that she was ‘highly reactive’.
· As a retired teacher with 15 years full-time teaching experience and a former National Trust Tours & Talks Volunteer Guide at Hardwick Hall, Kate had plenty of relevant experience in talking to the public and was well qualified to perform the duties of an Education Volunteer with the RNLI.
· Her rejection still stands. Kate has received no acknowledgement or proper apology for what was said and done by the Burry Port RNLI Operations Manager, who remains in post.
· RNLI Headquarters are still in denial about the discrimination suffered by Kate Mason.
· Kate and her wife have been forced to move from Burry Port as they no longer felt safe or welcome in the local community.
· Meanwhile the RNLI Chief Executive gloats on Twitter about flying the Rainbow Flag in support of International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia.
For more information see:
https://ambergoth.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/breath-taking-hy…-outside-rnli-hq/
https://ambergoth.wordpress.com/2016/05/13/an-inconvenient-…ed-to-silence-me/
https://ambergoth.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/update-on-discri…ing-done-by-rnli/
https://ambergoth.wordpress.com/2015/07/13/transphobia-at-the-rnli/
http://www.causes.com/campaigns/96412-end-discrimination-at-the-rnli-against-transgender-people
One Sunday night several weeks ago I found two police officers from our local police force (not in Wales), who on behalf of the Dyfed-Powys Police issued me with a very intimidating so-called ‘desist from harassing through social media’ notice in relation to a person in the management of the local RNLI Station concerned. I was told that if I continued to post on social media about this, I might get a criminal record. I had to sign that I had received the notice.
So let’s get this straight: AS A TRANS WOMAN I AM THE VICTIM OF DISCRIMINATORY BEHAVIOUR BY THE RNLI – but the police, the EHRC (Equality & Human Rights Commission), Stonewall, and any number of other agencies and people that are supposed to uphold the rights of #LGBT people – could do nothing about it. But when a local RNLI manager complains to the police about what I am saying on social media – I AM THREATENED WITH A CRIMINAL RECORD.
This was a blatant attempt to silence my campaign for justice and for the RNLI to stop their cover-up. I regret I am therefore no longer able to name the individual concerned who persuaded the local police to take out this notice against me, and also I cannot now name the local Station in which he is a member of the management team.
I have also just discovered that the #RNLI @RNLI tweeted this to my @peakeasy Twitter account on 15th January: ‘At no stage was Kate told she would not be suitable to volunteer as a education officer because she is transgendered’.
Whilst it may be true that the exact words: ‘We are rejecting your education volunteer application because you are transgendered,’ may not have been used – that is precisely the implication of what was said – see my tweets in reply which can be read in full @peakeasy: https://twitter.com/peakeasy/with_replies.
The main point I made (yet again) was this:
I was told by the local management that I was rejected ‘because the Station is too “macho” to have a trans woman volunteer,’ and because the local Station by their own admission could not ‘cope’ with a trans woman as there would be ‘gossip’.
Doesn’t that mean that I was rejected because I am transgendered?
Of course, the two individuals concerned have also denied that they said this. That was to be expected. They would deny it, wouldn’t they?
The simple truth which they cannot dispute is:
- The RNLI REJECTED my volunteer application.
- Their local management rejected me after I discussed with them that a member of their shore crew referred to me in the wrong gender as ‘this gentleman’, in front of a group of nursery children and their parents (highly embarrassing) – whilst supposedly ‘training’ me in the role of Education Officer – by demonstrating (poorly) ‘how to do a talk to visitors.’ (This person DID in fact apologise properly and sincerely by letter for what happened, which I regarded as a minor issue anyway. However, a member of the local management whom I am now unable to name has intractably refused to apologise regarding HIS behaviour, throughout all our proceedings with the RNLI).
- I invited them to our home and discussed the ‘this gentleman’ incident in a non-confrontational way, in order to help them, but this ‘impossible-to-name’ individual was particularly very defensive. HE was highly reactive, in fact, which is ironically what RNLI Headquarters accused me of, some weeks later, as their fabricated reason for my rejection.
- Two weeks after the meeting at which we discussed the ‘this gentleman’ incident, the local management asked for another meeting with us, at which they rejected my volunteer application outright, saying they were rejecting me because their RNLI Station was too ‘macho’ to be able to ‘cope’ with a trans woman as a volunteer and they feared their would be ‘gossip’ about me. (Pretty cowardly?) Naturally they have later denied that they said this, because to admit what they said would prove my assertion that I WAS rejected because I am transgendered.
- I reiterate: they DID NOT give as their reason for my rejection on 16th June 2015 that I was ‘highly reactive’ – this was only concocted as the excuse for my rejection some weeks later, in a rude and dismissive letter from the RNLI People & Transformation Director.
- My wife Jane was a witness to both the meetings in our own home with the RNLI local management, and has confirmed my account of what happened and what they said. She herself was very upset.
- The actions of the RNLI locally and at Headquarters level in rejecting my volunteer application BECAUSE I am transgendered – AND FOR NO OTHER REASON – WAS discriminatory against me as a trans woman.
- Consequently, I HAVE been discriminated against as a member of the trans and LGBT community by the RNLI.
- Two damn right my later use of social media to get justice has been highly reactive, and I make no apology for that. But it occurred AFTER the rejection and discrimination against me on 16th June 2015, because I could not get the RNLI to address this properly, and because of the misinformation and untruths they have subsequently perpetrated.
If their local management would care to have a meeting with us face-to-face (which I have already offered to do via RNLI Headquarters, but they have declined to meet us) – Jane and I would be happy to put the above points to them ourselves, and see if they care to tell the same untruths and misrepresentations about it to our faces.
Re: Discrimination by RNLI (Royal National Lifeboat Institution) against transgender woman
http://www.causes.com/campaigns/96412-end-discrimination-at-the-rnli-against-transgender-people
I have been fighting for justice and for the truth to come out since June of this year, but the RNLI has not responded appropriately or effectively addressed the discrimination I have suffered. Instead they have whitewashed the individuals concerned at the local RNLI Station and chosen to believe their lies and misrepresentations. This despite the fact that the RNLI claims to be a ‘Stonewall Diversity Champion’.
Here again is a summary of what happened:
- In April 2015, Trevor Griffiths, the Chair of the Local Management Committee at the RNLI Burry Port Lifeboat Station (which is near Llanelli, South-West Wales) informed my wife they were ‘desperate for help with their educational work’. As I am a retired teacher and I had also been a National Trust Tours and Talks Guide for seven years at Hardwick Hall, North Derbyshire, I was well qualified and had relevant experience, so I was encouraged to put in an application to volunteer with the RNLI Burry Port Station as a ‘Lifeboat Visits Team Member’.
- On 18th May 2015 we were invited to attend a meeting at the Burry Port Lifeboat Station, where we completed application forms and talked about our experience and qualifications and how we hoped to be able to help the RNLI with their educational work locally. We were introduced as ‘Kate and Jane’, a married couple, and they did not seem to have any problems that we were both women and married to each other, or that one of us was a trans woman. Trevor Griffiths has confirmed that he knew that I was a transgender person at this stage, though it wasn’t discussed.
- A few days later, for training purposes, we were asked to attend a talk at the Lifeboat Station given by Mal, a member of the Shore Crew. The talk was to a group of local nursery children and their parents. During this talk, Mal made a joke at my expense while referring to an RNLI dummy dressed in full RNLI gear. Although I was not standing very near the dummy and there was no reason to refer to me at all, he pretended he thought it was necessary to distinguish between myself and the dummy, saying that he was referring to the dummy and not to ‘this gentleman’. This apparent ‘mistake’ about my gender was in spite of the fact that he had been previously introduced to me as ‘Kate’, the partner of Jane, and as I have shoulder-length blonde hair and have also had extensive facial feminisation surgery – I do not look much like a man. You will appreciate that his behaviour was very insensitive and embarrassing for me. Burry Port is a small place, and we live just round the corner from the nursery from which the visitors had come. During the later course of his talk, when he had paused for a moment, I waved him over and said quietly to him, ‘not gentleman – lady.’ After the talk Jane and I went straight home, as we did not feel it would be productive or helpful to discuss the incident further with him at that time.
- We felt that the best way to deal with it was to invite Trevor Griffiths to our home so we could discuss what had happened. Our intention was to talk about it in a friendly, low-key way so as to help them avoid this sort of mistake in the future. Roger Bowen, the L.O.M. (Local Operations Manager) at RNLI Burry Port, invited himself to this meeting.
- During this first meeting in our own home, Roger Bowen said that Mal realised he had ‘dropped a bollock’ (to use Mr. Bowen’s words). However, Roger Bowen seemed more concerned to let us know that Mal was ‘hurt’ that we had the temerity to bring this up. He did not seem at all bothered about the embarrassment which had been caused to me.
- Roger Bowen said that before I started as a volunteer, he wanted to get all 21 crew members and ancillary volunteers together and make an announcement to them that a transgender person would be starting as a volunteer. (Some weeks later, this friendly and positive meeting in our own home was untruthfully misrepresented as being ‘highly reactive’ and given as the reason for my rejection as a volunteer. The formal rejection was in a letter from Heidi Allen, the so-called ‘People and Transformation Director’ at RNLI headquarters.
- A couple of days after the meeting, I had second thoughts about the ‘general announcement’ that Roger Bowen wanted to make regarding my transgender status. I suggested that if he wanted to talk privately to anyone who he felt might be prejudiced or unsure about a transgender person starting as a volunteer, that would be okay with me, but that I would prefer otherwise to talk to people myself about being transgender, if I felt the need or I thought it would be helpful.
- This seemed to be accepted by Trevor Griffiths and Roger Bowen, and so we anticipated that we would be hearing shortly from them about starting as volunteers.
- A few days later I received an email from Trevor Griffiths, asking for another meeting.
- Again, Roger Bowen invited himself to this meeting. They announced that they were rejecting my volunteer application and didn’t even want me to start as a volunteer. The reason given was that, and I quote the exact words used: “the ‘culture’ of the Burry Port Station is too ‘macho’ to have a transgender person working there as a volunteer’. They said there would be too much gossip. I said I didn’t mind what people said behind my back, as long as I wasn’t abused to my face. I mentioned my experience dealing with the public at the National Trust and that I’d had no problems with other volunteers or with staff or visitors at the National Trust property where I had been a Tours & Talks Guide and a Room Guide for seven years. I pointed out that over three years of my time with the National Trust were after I had transitioned, and I had been fully accepted in my female role and it had not cause any problems. It made no difference.
- Bowen and Mr. Griffiths were not open to further discussion about my rejection as a volunteer. They just rudely marched out of our house, after dropping this on us.
- We were both devastated and couldn’t believe what had happened. The same evening as the meeting, I sent several increasingly desperate SMS texts and then a long email to Trevor Griffiths, copied to Roger Bowen, imploring them to reconsider and pointing out that rejecting me because I was transgender was unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 and that if they didn’t reconsider, I would consider reporting them to the police and the EHRC. (I had no intention at this stage of doing so, because I hoped they would be open to reason.)
- I received a single short text back from Trevor Griffiths, saying that they thought they had ‘handled the issue as delicately as they could’.
- After that, I was informed that Trevor Griffiths had gone on holiday for three weeks (although it was over seven weeks before we received any further communication from him).
- I felt absolutely gutted, and Jane was on the edge of tears for a couple of weeks after this.
- I knew I needed help in dealing with this situation, so I searched online for ‘LGBT support Llanelli’. A site called ‘Spotted Llanelli’ came up. I put the following post on it: ‘I am a transgender person who has just – this afternoon – experienced discrimination and prejudice against me in Burry Port, from the RNLI station, because I am transgender. Are there any trans groups locally who can help or at least give me a shoulder to cry on?’
- No one contacted me from RNLI headquarters or locally until I made this very mild post (above) on the ‘Spotted Llanelli’ website, after which I was telephoned by Sue Kingswood, so-called ‘Inclusion Officer’ of the RNLI.
- She said she would not have known about the situation if I had not made that post, and thanked me for drawing it to her attention. She was glad that I had done so. NOTHING would have happened otherwise.
- Sue Kingswood and Matt Crofts (Regional RNLI Officer) came to visit us the following week. They promised us they would deal appropriately with the discrimination I had suffered.
- They DID NOT deal with the discrimination properly and my rejection still stands.
- I had to wait seven weeks to get any sort of communication from Trevor Griffiths, Chair of the Local Management Group, which still did not address properly the issues I have raised.
- All I have so far received from Roger Bowen, the Local Operations Manager at RNLI Burry Port, is a contemptuous and dismissive one-line letter referring to the original incident with Mal, but in no way addressing the substantive issue of my discrimination complaint or acknowledging what was said by Mr Bowen in the two meetings in our home.
- From the above, it will be clear that I DID try to go through the proper channels in the way I dealt with this. (The RNLI’s Legal Counsel argues that this was not the case, and that because I felt eventually I had no choice but to ‘go public’ by posting on social media about it, this disqualifies me from being treated properly or being offered any sort of resolution acceptable to myself and my wife, because my posts ‘upset’ the local people concerned.
- It is the RNLI that did not deal with my complaint properly, or in a timely way, and the situation escalated due to the incompetence and intransigence of both the local RNLI personnel in Burry Port and at RNLI Headquarters level.
- I understand from the most recent correspondence with their Legal Counsel that the RNLI are still not going to deal appropriately and effectively with the prejudice and discrimination I suffered, or withdraw my rejection as a volunteer.
- They continue to maintain that they believe the lies and misrepresentations of the two individuals concerned at the local RNLI Station, while giving no credence to our account of what happened.
- The two people have been allowed to remain in post.
- I have asked the Legal Counsel of the RNLI, Duncan Macpherson, if they could appoint someone from within the RNLI or from an outside agency who is transgender or LGBT, or at least someone who might be more impartial, to liaise with me in order to help achieve a resolution acceptable to both sides. They have refused. I assume from their reply that they have been unable to find anyone who is either trans or LGBT within the RNLI, and can’t be bothered to contact an outside agency.
- I have therefore requested statistics from the RNLI on the following:
- How many RNLI salaried staff and RNLI volunteers are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender;
- How many RNLI salaried staff and RNLI volunteers are from ethnic or racial minorities;
- How many RNLI salaried staff and RNLI volunteers are from religions other than Christian or of no religion (they must surely have at least this information in relation to lifeboat crews who risk their lives, as they would need to know their religion in the case of death or mortal injury).
- How many RNLI salaried staff and RNLI volunteers are registered disabled.
I am not very sanguine that any such statistics from the RNLI will be forthcoming or that they have even collected such information (as local authorities commonly do), but I can but try.
The RNLI Burry Port Station is not unusual. The RNLI as a whole is a very white, very ‘traditionally gendered’, very heterosexual organisation with very few women (whether trans or not) in active roles as Shore Crew or Lifeboat Crew. In fact I was initially only applying to be an Education Volunteer, for which I was well qualified, but my rejection as Shore Crew was equally emphatic. In the case of the local Burry Port Station – the RNLI is also very Welsh – run and managed by just four local Welsh families, who run it as their personal fiefdom and each occupy 2-3 roles at RNLI Burry Port. This ‘closed-shop’ situation is by no means unusual in RNLI Lifeboat Stations in Wales, or more remote stations in England and Scotland. (Sue Kingswood, RNLI Inclusion Advisor, has admitted this to us.) The RNLI needs radical reform. It needs to be pushed to join the 21st century and accept and welcome the diversity of modern society in the U.K.
I can’t do this all on my own.
It is HIGH TIME the RNLI started to implement their own Inclusiveness Programme, and earn the right to be ‘Stonewall Diversity Champions’, which they claim to be.
Please, please, HELP by signing our online petition:
http://www.causes.com/campaigns/96412-end-discrimination-at-the-rnli-against-transgender-people
Unlawful Transphobic Discrimination at the RNLI – they are getting away with it!
Please sign my petition: http://www.causes.com/campaigns/96412-end-discrimination-at-the-rnli-against-transgender-people
The RNLI has recently shown itself to be transphobic: prejudiced against transgender people. This came to light in the first instance when the management at RNLI Burry Port rejected the volunteer application of trans woman Kate Lesley on the grounds that, to quote what they actually said at a meeting on 16th June 2015:
“The ‘culture’ of the local RNLI Burry Port Lifeboat Station is too ‘macho’ to ‘cope’ with a trans woman as a volunteer.”
Some weeks later, in order to justify their rejection of Kate Lesley, they lied about this and denied what they had said, although this was also witnessed by Kate’s wife, Jane.
RNLI Headquarters then compounded the situation by failing to deal effectively with this discrimination. Instead, they actually whitewashed the two individuals concerned at RNLI Burry Port and supported them in their misrepresentations about what happened.
The RNLI next fabricated a spurious excuse for Kate’s rejection, claiming that they were rejecting her because of her reaction to a previous incident when a member of the shore crew tactlessly and insensitively referred to her in the wrong gender – as ‘this gentleman’ – although he had previously been introduce to her as ‘Kate’. This was supposed to have been a ‘genuine mistake’ (you can decide for yourselves how likely this is by looking at the photos of Kate on this blog – she doesn’t look much like a man, does she?). It was very embarrassing at the time as it was in front of a group of parents and children from the local nursery, just up the road. Burry Port is a small place.
After inviting the RNLI Burry Port management to discuss this incident in a friendly way in order to help the Station avoid a mistake of this type in future, nothing happened for a couple of weeks, and it was assumed that Kate’s and Jane’s written volunteer applications were being processed and they would soon be starting their volunteer roles with the RNLI. It now appears the local management had already decided to reject Kate – because she had the courage to bring this initial incident to their attention. The opportunity to show a more inclusive, enlightened and progressive approach to LGBT people was to be squandered, because of their embarrassment, awkwardness and uncertainty about the best way to handle things.
Kate’s approach at this helpful, low-key meeting was untruthfully misrepresented some weeks later by the RNLI as ‘highly reactive’ and used as the spurious excuse for Kate’s rejection. It certainly was nothing of the sort. It was an amicable meeting on all sides, from which much good might have come, if only the local management had known how to proceed in a mature and sensible way.
Kate’s rejection as a volunteer was despite the fact that, as a retired full-time classroom teacher for 15 years and a Tours and Talks Guide with the National Trust for 7 years, she was very well qualified and had plenty of experience of talking to the public, regularly giving talks to groups of up to 40-50 people.
Although she was giving up her spare time for free, rather than giving her a chance to prove what she could do as a volunteer to help them with their educational work, they said they didn’t even want her to start.
Kate and her wife Jane were flabbergasted – very shocked and upset. Jane had also volunteered to help them, but they say in their final response to us that they have not rejected her – could this be because she is not transgendered herself, just married to a transgendered person? Apparently that’s okay, they just don’t want any LGBT people in person as volunteers.
To protest against this unlawful discrimination against Kate, please contact the RNLI as below and add your voice, so these bigoted and unenlighted people don’t get away with it.
And in case anyone thinks that the RNLI should be a ‘protected’ charity which one should never criticise, and how dare I bring this to the attention of the public through social media, let me state clearly now that I do appreciate the wonderful work done by the RNLI in rescuing folk from the sea, and the last thing I want to do is distract the RNLI from their valuable work in this regard. However, under the Equality Act 2010 it is unlawful to discriminate against anyone for reasons of gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity etc., and they need to be made accountable and brought to book for this.
If you wish to read the full transcript of all correspondence with the RNLI relating to the above, please now click on the link below:
pdf-all-rnli-corresp-to-09-09-15
—————————————
The RNLI Lifeboat Station in Burry Port, near Llanelli, Wales, is a very nepotistic institution. It is largely run by a closed-shop of the same local families, who treat it as their personal fiefdom, to do with as they wish. To judge by the attitude of their Operations Manager, they are small-minded and intolerant of diversity, keeping out anyone who may not fit into their restrictive ‘macho’ image of themselves. There is only one woman member of the crew out of 21, and she belongs to one of the local families which dominate the station.
Nepotism is rife at RNLI Burry Port. See their website and note the number of times the same surnames appear: Bowen, Griffiths, Morgan, Williams: http://www.burryportrnli.com/
Make no mistake – this is not because many people in Wales have common surnames – these people are all closely related; they are members of the same local families. (The following list of names are publicly available on RNLI Burry Port’s own website, so I am not revealing anything confidential here: http://www.burryportrnli.com/ )
Roger Bowen – Lifeboat Operations Manager (L.O.M.)
Alan Bowen – Treasurer (L.M.G)
Beryl Bowen – Fundraisin Chairperson
Trevor Griffiths – Chairperson (L.M.G)
Alyson Griffiths – Fundraising Committee Treasurer
Haydn Morgan – Deputy Launch Authority (D.L.A.) & Lifeboat Sea Safety Officer(L.S.S.O.)
Susanna Morgan – Crew & Education Officer
Gary Morgan – Crew & Education Officer
Rachel Morgan – Fundraising Committee
Steve Williams – Boathouse Manager
Byron Williams – Media Admin
Beverley Williams – Fundraising Committee
Unfortunately I have three ‘strikes’ against me – I am English, I am transgendered, and I am not a Bowen, a Griffiths, a Morgan or a Williams.
Please read below, and then please do support me in my campaign against these bigoted troglodytes, who are still living in a previous century.
If you wish, you can read the full transcript (see link above) of ALL correspondence with the RNLI – which makes interesting reading, showing how hard we tried to make the RNLI see sense.
Please support me by expressing your disgust with how the RNLI have treated me both at the local and national, headquarters level. Write to, email or phone the RNLI people concerned. If enough folk contact them, maybe we will finally get the RNLI to respond as they should have done to the unlawful transphobic discrimination to which I have been subjected. The RNLI claims to be a ‘Stonewall Diversity Champion’ – what a joke!
Contact Details:
Email: Burry-Port@rnli.org.uk
Station Telephone: 01554 832060
Burry Port Lifeboat Station
The Harbour
Burry Port
Carmarthenshire
SA16 0ER
——————————
Lifeboat Operations Manager (L.O.M.), RNLI Station Burry Port: Roger Bowen
Mr Bowen lied about what was said at our meeting with him and Trevor Griffiths on 16th June; misrepresented the facts and failed to acknowledge or admit to any of the discriminative comments he made, subsequently inventing a spurious and untruthful excuse for my rejection as an RNLI volunteer while denying the true grounds, which were based on transphobic prejudice.
Email. Roger_bowen@rnli.org.uk
(These contact details are publicly available on RNLI Burry Port’s own website.)
————————————–
Trevor Griffiths – Chairperson Local Management Group (L.M.G), Burry Port Lifeboat Station (Took seven weeks to write a letter in response to our complaint, but denied what had been said at our meeting with them on 16th June).
————————————-
(The following contact details are publicly available on the RNLI Headquarters main website and linked webpages).
RNLI Chief Executive: Paul Boissier
‘Whitewashed’ the local RNLI station, claimed to believe their lies, failed to address the discrimination issue properly despite signing up the RNLI as a ‘Stonewall Diversity Champion’
Postal address:
Paul Bossier
Chief Executive RNLI
West Quay Road
Poole
BH15 1HZ
Email: paul_boissier@rnli.org.uk
Tel: 01202 663149
Fax: 01202 663306
——————————-
Inclusion & Diversity Officer: Susan Kingswood (Did very little in spite of her title and went off on holiday).
Address:
Susan Kingswood
RNLI O.D. Advisor
Inclusion & Diversity
West Quay Road
Poole
Dorset
BH151HZ
Email: susan_kingswood@rnli.org.uk
Tel: 01202 663338
———————————————
People and Transformation Director: Heid Allen
(Note her job description – this is not ironic, it is her actual title! And she was one of the LEAST helpful people at the RNLI, totally lacking in empathy, and rather spiteful in her letter to me in which she confirmed my rejection.)
Postal Address:
Heidi Allen
RNLI People and Transformation Director
West Quay Road
Poole
BH15 1HZ
Tel: 01202 663137
———————————
Watched Bert & Dickie on Beeb 1 (BBC 1) tonight, set at the time of the 1948 Olympics here in Old Blighty, last time we hosted it. Hadn’t intended to ‘cos I’m sick of all the fuss about the feckin’ Olympics already, not being a sporty type and left-handed and all. But what it was really about was the British class system, still alive and well in 2012, when we are even now ruled by Eaton and Oxford school boys.
And what occurred to me is that the 1945-51 Clement Attlee Labour government was the best and greatest government we’ve ever had. They managed to stage the 1948 Olympics and the 1951 Festival of Britain at a time when the country was bankrupt having just fought the Second World War; and yet the Attlee government somehow managed also to nationalise coal, steel and the railways and launch the National Health Service, greatly improve primary and secondary education and living standards for ordinary people, and lay the foundations of the welfare state which remained in existence until Margaret Thatcher set about systematically dismantling it and destroying the post-war consensus which prevailed through all British governments, both Tory and Labour, until 1979.
And after Thatcher we had Blair (or Thatcher Mk II), who inherited a very prosperous country compared with what Clement Attlee faced, and what did he do? He invented ‘New Labour’, continued squandering North Sea oil, got us involved in pointless and costly foreign wars, ‘liberalised’ the City of London, the banks and the financial sector which led directly to the financial collapse and banking crisis of 2008; the rich got richer, ordinary folk got screwed, and now we are told we can’t afford to allow the elderly dignity in old age, we force them to sell their homes to finance their nursing care, and the young from less well-off families are thrown into decades of debt because they are forced to pay university fees and take out loans to finance their university educations which Blair’s generation got for free! All of which could have been afforded by the country easily if we hadn’t been dragged into expensive foreign wars and if the rich hadn’t been given free rein to get richer while most ordinary folk got poorer.
And we are told by the Eaton and Oxbridge ruling elite to ‘tighten our belts’ and put up with it! It MAKES ME MAD!
(Copy of email to Bury North Labour Party CLP Members 17/07/16)
Please excuse my passion and please, please, do read all this (below).
RE: Affiliated Labour Party organisations, £25 voting surcharge for new members, & *possible* Fundraising Dog Walk
On reading this again it sounds a bit like a kind of ‘suicide note’ or ‘resignation letter’ to the Labour Party, but as most of you won’t read it at all or at least won’t read all of it – or respond – who cares?
I was going to organise a fundraising dog walk (but please note: you don’t have to have a dog) for all Bury North CLP members and ‘registered supporters’, (other local CLPs also welcome) – for both new Labour Party members and the ‘experienced’ members (I didn’t want to say ‘old lags’) from whom we new ‘pups’ (however old) can learn so much – but I don’t see any point, as probably no-one will respond – or come – given the almost total lack of response to my previous email about the £25 ‘new member voter surcharge’ and ban on meetings until October.
Maybe some of you could at least let me know whether you would come on a fundraising dog walk (with or without a dog) – probably will be in October now – say £1 for unwaged /pensioners and £2 or £3 per dog or ‘hooman’ for rest – starting off at a country location or Bury centre pub / & also non-alcohol café, and ending there? Another idea for fundraising would be to do a cask ale pub crawl (also with choice of soft drinks) or something along the lines of a Rail Ale combined with the East Lancs. Railway, again, soft drinks also available (with apologies to teetotal members or those who for faith reasons are against alcohol – but you would still be very welcome to come – I’ll make sure there is a café alternative for meeting up and finishing).
At the moment, however, I am wondering, why should I bother, when I can’t even vote in the Leader Election for this Party?
I would like to thank the only two members in the whole Labour Bury North CLP on the emailing list who were not too apathetic? angry with me? perplexed? or whatever to reply or discuss my previous email about these ridiculous NEC rulings disenfranchising Labour Party full members who joined after 12th January unless they make a payment of an extra £25, and for forbidding all CLPs from meeting until October.
Thank you, the only two members who replied, for your replies and support. I am beginning to see it does indeed seem to be the case that the vast majority of new members (who may or may not have voted for Corbyn) DO NOT get involved and leave it to the long-standing experienced activists to do all the work – who may, some of them, not be fans of Corbyn – but at least attend meetings, fundraising events, go out on the doorstep and get involved – I applaud your efforts and thank you for your hard work for our CLP, (well, YOUR CLP, as how can I be a part of it if I can’t even vote?)
I reiterate, I am a FULL MEMBER and an AFFILIATED MEMBER and I have just been to this page http://support.labour.org.uk/ (which is STILL there on Labour Party website and I registered for the second time to become a ‘registered supporter’ as well (sic) – I am waiting to hear response to my online application as member of LGBT Labour, which IS an affiliated group – so why is this still ‘live’ on the Labour website if it ‘doesn’t apply’?
How long will it be before you change the rules again, so even if you pay the £25 you won’t be able to vote? How can we trust you? I don’t trust the Labour Party anymore, you seem to be making it up as you go along.
Yes, this is getting ridiculous! I would end up having paid £3 as a previous registered supporter last year + full Labour Party membership + £15 to join LGBT Labour + this extra £25 ‘voting surcharge for new members’ (which I am not paying). This surely cannot be allowed to stand? I watched JC on Sunday Politics this morning, and he also doesn’t seem to think the ‘£25 extra’ is fair, or the ban on CLP meetings; ditto most ‘Soft-Left and even some Blairite MPs think it’s unfair. If I compare our ‘yet another new’ Labour Shadow Education Secretary talking to Andrew Neil with how the rather impressive new Tory Education Secretary did – well, watch the footage for yourselves. The Tories are running rings round Labour at the moment, and we are providing NO sort of opposition or proper policy statements about helping the N. of England – just pathetic examples of in-fighting and a seemly supine acceptance of NEC lunacy.
Surely these NEC rulings MUST be overturned or there must be an appeal or challenge against them, whether you are pro- or anti- Corbyn, for sake of fair play? I am new to politics and to the Labour Party, but (and apologies if you think this is rude): are all of you so docile and cowed by the NEC and PLP or even possibly your local CLP that you don’t have minds and opinions of your own? (*Effort to provoke response*) We are just sent out this two or three line email from the Secretary saying ‘you can’t meet’, with no further explanation or discussion.
I would like to know, on behalf of ALL Bury North CLP members and past Labour Party voters in Bury (many of whom voted Brexit and have probably already gone to UKIP or Tories) – what is the position of our CLP on this, what is the position of our Executive Committee, what is the position of our Bury North councillors, and above all what are any of you going to do about it, if anything
I am wondering if I am in a DEMOCRATIC party at all?
Probably not for long, some of you are thinking…well, feel free to expel me for asking ‘awkward’ questions, but freedom of speech is one of my most cherished illusions – that we still have it in this country, this Old Blighty, this Sceptered Isle – but do we even have it in this Party? Do we have anything even approaching real democracy in this county or this Party?
See my Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/ambergoth This is the 21st century – why can’t we use secure online digital technology to add REGULAR DIRECT VOTING by the electorate to our representational democracy, on the most important issues affecting this country? Most people have ‘smartphones’, even in the most deprived areas where folk are not registered to vote or don’t vote in General Elections, and they are cheap enough to GIVE to anybody who doesn’t have one. To see how easy this would be – try out the ‘Note My Vote’ app https://www.notemyvote.co.uk/ (I am not connected in any way with this, but it’s a bit of fun and shows you how it might work).
I’ll tell you why they will never reform our democracy willingly – the ‘Powers That Be’, The ‘Establishment Great & Good’ – AND the PLPs of both major parties as presently constituted would be against this – as it would mean giving more power and a regular say to ‘ordinary people’, us plebs and peasants, to decide what happens in matters that affect us all. And we can’t be trusted can we? Look what happened in the EU Referendum…! Oh dear me no, we can whistle for that!
To conclude: it’s just £25 to join the Tory Party and I don’t think there would have been any newly introduced gerrymandering measures re. who could vote for their leader (if they’d had an election that went to the membership, which of course it didn’t), but I can’t check because a copy of the Constitution of the Tory Party costs £10 apparently, and many of us can’t afford that any more than we can afford the extra bloody £25 to vote in the Labour Leadership Election! (No, I’m not thinking of joining the Tories at the moment.)
**Don’t suppose many of you read to this point – but if you did – well done. You are a literate Labour Party supporter in the North of England, contrary to what the media think!**
PLEASE REPLY – PLEASE SAY ANYTHING! IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE? (…..Tumbleweed rolls across Bury…..) DO YOU WANT TO COME ON A DOG WALK (WITH OR WITHOUT A DOG) or shall I just ‘call the whole thing off’, together with my Labour Party membership?
Is this Party even worth raising funds for?
‘No offence’, as the late great Mrs. Merton used to say,
Best wishes & love to y’all, be ye Corbynites or Blairites or something in between…
Kate Mason
P.S. Please, please, please sign petition re: discrimination of RNLI against LGBT people:
https://www.causes.com/campaigns/96412-end-discrimination-at-the-rnli-against-transgender-people
https://www.facebook.com/ambergoth
https://www.facebook.com/GothicKate
https://ambergoth.wordpress.com/
Policies of the New Libertarian Independent Secular Party (L.I.S.P.)
Like the Libertarian Party in the U.S., the New Libertarian Independent Secular Party – launched here today, 22nd October 2012 – reflects the ideas of libertarianism, favouring a secular, humanist society, a less powerful state (except for the re-nationalisation of essential public utilities), strong civil liberties (including support for same-sex marriage and other LGBT rights), minimum restrictions on freedom of speech and expression, the legalization of cannabis, separation of church and state, non-interventionism and neutrality in diplomatic relations (i.e., avoiding foreign military entanglements with other nations), freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries, and a more responsive and direct democracy using modern digital technology to enable citizens to vote directly on important issues.
We would:
1) Re-nationalise all public utilities and industries which were nationalised by the Attlee government in 1945 and privatised by the Thatcher government after 1979, to include gas, electricity, water, raillways, telecoms, coal and steel.
2) Provide free residential and nursing support for the elderly in care and nursing homes without means testing or requiring the sale of the elderly person’s house and free home help care for the elderly still living in their own homes.
3) Impose heavy penalties on bankers and all financial traders, managers, executives, stock brokers, commodity and derivatives traders, hedge fund managers etc. found guilty of negligence, fraud, financial malfeasance, misconduct or impropriety – penalties to include large fines, confiscation of personal assets and property, and imprisonment.
4) Abolish prescription charges and make all hospital car parks free.
5) Withdraw all U.K. troops and military personal immediately from Afghanistan, Iraq and all other foreign interventions; no Prime Minister or U.K. government EVER to take the nation to war again without a national referendum.
6) Abolish university fees and re-introduce full grants for all students from low income families and proportional grants combined with a moderate parental financial contribution for students from middle income families; high income families to pay full costs of children’s university education.
7) Abolish religious denomination schools and re-introduce technical and vocational colleges alongside grammar and academy schools, but none of them to be under local authority or central government control.
8) Abolish Ofsted, SATs, school league tables and the National Curriculum*. Allow schools to determine their own curriculums and educational priorities, financed by a voucher system like the one in Sweden.
9) Revert ‘new’ universities back to polytechnic status or re-designate as technical universities and require them to run high quality technology, engineering and I.C.T. courses together with overseeing a large expansion in apprenticeship schemes.
10) Require the universities of Oxford, Cambridge and other ‘top 20’ universities to take at least 70% of students from U.K. state secondary schools and no more than 10% from U.K. private schools and no more than 20% intake of overseas students.
11) Use the Internet and digital technology to reform democracy in the 21st century and give power back to the people. We have social networking on the World Wide Web – why not electronic voter networking using the Internet, mobile phones, chip and pin systems etc. to enable ordinary citizens to vote on important political issues?**
12) Legalise cannabis and allow sale of cannabis through licensed distribution (eg. through public houses, which would help to reinvigorate the licensed trade and traditional pub sector).
13) Reduce excise duty on cask conditioned beers and remove it completely on beers brewed by micro-breweries. Lower excise duty on single malt whiskies and blended whiskies but increase excise duty on ‘alcopops’. Break up monopolies of large pub ownership companies which charge landlords and pub managers extortionate rents.
14) De-criminalise prostitution and make provision for regular health checks and contraception for sex workers.
*Politicians should let teachers get on with their jobs instead of always interfering in education and using it as a political football (this also applies to the health service). They should recognise what teachers and other educational professionals have always known: that educational achievement is largely influenced by social, familial, economic and class factors.
Why do politicians fail to acknowledge what is so obvious to anyone who actually works in education? Educational achievement is adversely affected for children living in areas of social and economic deprivation, where there is high unemployment, family breakdown and multiple social problems. Children in such areas will inevitably perform poorly in standardised educational tests compared with children living in affluent areas where parents are themselves likely to have achieved higher educational levels and are predominantly in well-paid professional and managerial employment.
STOP castigating, criticizing, punishing and micro-managing teachers in schools located in deprived neighbourhoods. Let them get on with their job and stop interfering. DO NOT introduce more and more pointless bureaucratic assessment and tick-lists. DO NOT pay attention to educational consultants, local authority bureaucrats, Ofsted inspectors, or government ministers and their officials. Instead, ask the teachers ‘at the chalk face’ what they actually need and provide them with the extra resources required to make a difference. Introduce social and economic policies which really address problems of multiple deprivation.
Much of this was known as far back as 1967 when the Plowden Report was written, stressing that ‘at the heart of the educational process lies the child’ (not Ofsted, not SATS, not league tables, not local government educational advisers, not ministers of education).
It is pitiful that so little progress has been made since Plowden, which included the following recommendations:
- A national policy of ‘positive discrimination’ should favour schools in deprived neighbourhoods (Ch. 5)
- Nursery education should be available to children at any time after they reach the age of three (Ch. 9)
- Authorities maintaining selection should not rely on intelligence and attainment tests. (Ch. 11)
- The maximum size of primary school classes should be reduced (Ch. 20)
- More men teachers are needed in primary schools (Ch. 25)
————————————–
** Our current parliamentary system of so-called democracy means that voters only get a say once every five years and governments can do what they like in between elections. This system grew out of medieval kingship and the patronage of the ruling classes, and is hundreds of years out of date.
We now have the technology (the Internet, secure websites, smart phones, pin & chip cards, etc.) to enable ordinary people to vote on major issues which affect them in everyday life. So why don’t we harness this technology to make a quantum leap towards real democracy and thereby reduce the power of parliament and the executive to decide everything? A few privileged people – mainly rich, mainly white and mainly men – who went to the same schools and universities and belong to the same clubs – currently rule us and make all the decisions on our behalf. Why can’t we vote on important issues ourselves through new voter networking technology? It is easily within our technical abilities as a society to introduce such a system to enable people to vote on important issues – perhaps once a week or once a month – but our rulers don’t want to cede that sort of power to ordinary voters; witness how many times we have been promised a vote on European Union treaties and successive governments have wriggled out of it.
We deserve a better system of democracy than the current antiquated system, where a load of privileged middle-aged and elderly men meet in two plush chambers in a vast 19th century Victorian Gothic edifice on the side of the Thames to ‘hear hear’ and ‘jeer jeer’ each other, while sleek bureaucrats in Whitehall write elephantine piles of ‘minutes’ and reports detailing all the reasons why nothing of a commonsense nature can ever be done.
