Blog Layout

The Mental Health Act matters - but gender ideology strikes again

Our public sector is swept along by irrational fashion, or perhaps bullying by LGBT+ diversity champions

Caroline ffiske was a Conservative Councillor for Eight Years. Published on 15 April 2021.


The Conservative Government continues to allow gender ideology to be rolled out across the public sector. The latest example is the Department of Health and Social Care in its important consultation on reforming The Mental Health Act. This is the Act which sets out when someone can be detained in hospital and treated for a mental health disorder, at times against their wishes. (Sometimes called being 'sectioned'.) The Act sets out the process for assessment, treatment, and the protection of people's rights.


If you respond to the consultation,
here is what you come across, directly after providing your age. 


Not 'What is your Sex? ' but 'How would you describe your gender?' 


Why has sex become irrelevant? Who decided that the consultation should ask the question in this manner? What about the Equality Act and the protected characteristic of sex, in law? 

 

What answers can you give? Options provided are: male (including transgender men); female (including transgender women); prefer not to say; or prefer to self-describe. Examples given for 'self-describe' are: 'non-binary, gender-fluid, agender'. How many people will even know what these terms mean? I just googled 'agender' and got: 'genderless, genderfree, genderblank neutrois'. Got it? 

Who decided that 'transgender men' should, for the purposes of this consultation, be counted amongst the men? And 'transgender women' amongst the women? Why wasn't categorisation by biological sex used? What was taken into consideration? How might this format skew the results? 

 

Men are significantly more likely to be sectioned than women. I expect that it is very often women who are involved in the traumatic decision to participate in the sectioning of someone who they love and who they may have come to fear. The consultation specifically refers to harm: 'We also want to change the detention criteria so that an individual is only detained if there is a substantial likelihood of significant harm to the health, safety or welfare of the person, or the safety of any other person'. Mothers might be involved in the tragic decision to section a son; a wife her husband. These are serious, difficult, and tragic decisions involving the state depriving vulnerable individuals of their freedom. There is sometimes violence leading up to or during the act. Yet the government decides to muddle gender ideology into this important consultation  - grab another opportunity for promotion. 

 

It also seems likely that women, as a group, will make different judgments to men about the sectioning process. Perhaps women would like lower barriers to state intervention; perhaps they would place a higher value on protection from potential harm or violence. It would be useful to be able to see whether this is so in the results of the consultation. Well that has been judged to be irrelevant by the Department of Health and Social Care. They'd rather know how people feel, 'by gender'. They want to know whether non-binary people have a different opinion to agender people. 


Compared to this tragedy, the next question is comic. It indicates the willingness of our public sector to be swept along by irrational fashion, or perhaps bullying by LGBT+ diversity champions. The State would like to know your sexual orientation before you respond to the Mental Health Act consultation. It tells you that if you are bisexual, this means you are 'attracted to more than one sex'. You can also say if you are pansexual or asexual. (To save you googling: 'Pansexuality means being attracted to all people regardless of gender identity or sex'.)

People responding to this consultation may have been involved in serious situations involving state incarceration of disturbed loved ones. And the Department of Health and Social Care, and its 'diversity champions', have the audacity to gatekeep the start of the consultation with this ideological drivel. Use the opportunity to spread the word, irrespective of the harm done. At the end of the consultation, we won't really know, for sure, how women feel differently to men about the tragic and significant process of state sectioning of the mentally ill. 

 

Women's views and voices matter. But they are in danger of being lost. Science, truth, and logic are being undermined. And the validity and precision of social and medical research.  But the Conservative Government seems casually indifferent - or captured?

by Caroline Ffiske 10 Oct, 2024
Will a gender critical barrister feel free to express her views in the workplace? Those of her client in court?
15 Jul, 2024
Almost a year ago I made the difficult decision to retire after the next general election. That election came a little earlier than expected but I made a promise to my family, so I am standing down from both Conservatives for Women and my parliamentary work. I know I am leaving our task in excellent hands; my fellow directors at Conservatives for Women will continue to ensure we solidify the gains we have made within our party, and my dear friends and colleagues in many other groups will hold the new government's feet to the fire. Some of those groups did not even exist three years ago; our movement to restore sanity, safeguarding, and protect our sex-based rights goes from strength to strength. I will be working in parliament until the end of July. I will continue to support our fight in any way I can, and will always be available if I can be of help. I am stepping back, but not completely stepping away. It has been an absolute honour to share this battle with you all. For the foreseeable future though, you will find me listening to Test Match Special in my shed :-) Karen Varley, 15 July 2024
15 Jul, 2024
Five years ago Conservatives for Women was born. We were a group of women shocked by how a marginal, unscientific, and harmful idea was taking centre stage in our shared public life. We knew, like everyone else, that a vanishingly small number of men and women seek to present as the opposite sex in their public and private lives and deserve to be treated civilly. But we did not believe that school children should be taught that ‘everyone has a gender identity’. We knew this involved the State lying to our children. We did not believe that vulnerable children should be supported by the NHS to take experimental drug treatments to suppress their puberty and then move on to cross sex hormones. We instinctively knew this was the State harming our children. We also knew that women had a right to single sex spaces, services, sports, and wider opportunities. And we knew that we had a right to talk about this; yet doing so, five years ago, appeared genuinely frightening. Women were losing their jobs. So a small bunch of Conservative women got together. For several years we worked incredibly closely even though we had never met! Because our goal was clear. We knew that what was going on had to be addressed at a policy level; at a parliamentary level. We needed the Conservative Party to become gender critical. While we worked cooperatively, Karen Varley became our group leader. I expect she had little idea, five years ago, that she would soon be working 70 hour weeks, engaging directly with Ministers, MPs and Peers, tackling serious policy issues in real time. Conservatives for Women, working alongside all the other gender critical groups and grassroots individuals, turned the tide on gender ideology in the UK. Together we created Terf Island. We know that our work is very far from over. But now Karen is retiring and we would like to thank her for a truly immense contribution. She’s played her part in a historic movement. We look forward to someone, someday, writing up this period in full. They will need to talk to Karen. And now our work will continue. Here’s to Karen Varley, grassroots women, and Terf Island! Caroline ffiske, 15 July 2024
12 Jun, 2024
We hope this newsletter finds you well and gearing up for an election battle that’s only just begun, and with the reminder that, however dire the polls, Teresa May had a 20 point lead over Jeremy Corbyn in 2017… and then she published the Conservative manifesto and enraged the public. Her lead plummeted and the Conservative’s majority shrank enough that she had to make a deal with the DUP to command a majority to govern. Labour should be publishing its manifesto tomorrow and there is every chance it contains something that will enrage the public at large. Even if that doesn’t transpire, there is still everything to play for, and to that end, our candidates need your help. We already know the Conservatives have pledged in its manifesto to make the Equality Act clear , to clarify that sex means, and has always meant, biological sex, and not something that can be modified by a piece of paper. This, along with other manifesto commitments, is a measure that will do a great deal to help preserve single sex spaces, and protect the safety and dignity of women and girls. We now need to get out there and make it clear that our candidates not only know what a woman actually is, but will always put the safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls first. If you haven’t read it, the full manifesto can be found here . We highlighted some of the key statements in our X thread here . One of the first candidates to give a clear and well informed response to questions on women’s rights and child safeguarding was Michael Tomlinson , Conservative candidate for Mid Dorset and North Poole. Let us know if your candidate says something useful! Below, we have listed every Conservative candidate who is known to be supportive of our aims. Every one of these candidates needs support, whether it’s through encouraging messages via social media or by offering assistance with canvasing – any and all help, however seemingly small, is desperately needed. This is by no means an exhaustive list, and we are sure there may be more but we wanted to get this out to you quickly. If you see them around and you intend to vote for them, tell them WHY they have your vote. If the opposition asks why you won’t vote for them, tell them too! Women's rights and child safeguarding matter. If you would like to get directly involved with any of the campaigns for the PPCs listed, you should find contact details on their websites; if nobody gets back to you quickly then let us know via a DM on X or email us at info@conservativesforwomen.org as we have direct contact with many of the campaign coordinators. If none of these MPs are local to you, there are still things you can do that help: follow them and like their pages/posts on social media for example. Many have a presence on X, Facebook, and Instagram. You could consider doing some telephone canvassing - just half an hour a day could make a difference to any one of them. Contact them directly - or volunteer via the Conservatives website. Or do call one of our directors Caroline Ffiske on 07712 675 305 if you have not done this before and would like a few tips! Let’s give this one last push before we all mark our Xs on the ballot papers. First of all, the women:
29 Sept, 2023
'Don’t turn your back on women and girls'
by Caroline ffiske 23 Aug, 2023
Conservative MPs and councillors need to pay much closer attention
22 Jul, 2023
Stonewall Chair Comes Unstuck on 'Trans' Issues
by Jeannette Towey 08 Apr, 2023
I am left wondering...
by Caroline ffiske 01 Feb, 2023
Then balance gender ideology alongside other beliefs, including opposition to it.
Show More
Share by: