https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/10
Hi @SussexUni @adamtickell @profsaulbecker @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal opportunities monitoring form in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female
Other.
https://t.co/DbKgiLN5yG
1/10
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/10
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/10
4/10
5/10
6/10
7/10
8/10
9/10
Please respond.
https://t.co/RJAWJ1vJ6s
10/10
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 @ASA_UK @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Diversity details section of your job application has what appears to be a partial list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. However, it has 'gender' but not sex.
1/10
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/10
You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male.
3/10
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
4/10
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.
5/10
The Diversity details section of your job application has what appears to be a partial list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. However, it has 'gender' but not sex.
1/10
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/10
You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female
Male.
3/10
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
4/10
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.
5/10
Hi @YorkStJohn @YSJJobsCareers @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal Opportunities Monitoring section in your job application mentions the protected characteristics under Equality Act 2010 & 'statutory reporting purposes'
However...
1/14
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
2/14
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/14
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.
4/14
You then ask "Does your gender identity match your sex as registered at birth".
5/14
The Equal Opportunities Monitoring section in your job application mentions the protected characteristics under Equality Act 2010 & 'statutory reporting purposes'
However...
1/14
However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
2/14
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
3/14
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.
4/14
You then ask "Does your gender identity match your sex as registered at birth".
5/14
Hi @bmj_latest @bmj_company @trishgreenhalgh @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The EEO section of your job application has 'gender' in what appears to be a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
1/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/11
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/11
You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
4/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
5/11
The EEO section of your job application has 'gender' in what appears to be a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
1/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/11
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/11
You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
4/11
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
5/11
Hi @ICOnews @HaysNews @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Diversity Monitoring section of your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Agender
Female
Gender fluid
Gender queer
Male
Non-binary
Other.
1/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/13
The Diversity Monitoring section of your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Agender
Female
Gender fluid
Gender queer
Male
Non-binary
Other.
1/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/13
More from Society
The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.
View the resolutions and voting results here:
The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.
Israel and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr
The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.
Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab
The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF
The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW
View the resolutions and voting results here:
The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.
Israel and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr
The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.
Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab
The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF
The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW
Imagine if Christians actually had to live according to their Bibles.
Imagine if Christians actually sacrificed themselves for the good of those they considered their enemies, with no thought of any recompense or reward, but only to honor the essential humanity of all people.
Imagine if Christians sold all their possessions and gave it to the poor.
Imagine if they relentlessly stood up for the widow, the orphan, and the foreigner.
Imagine if they worshipped a God whose response to political power was to reject it.
Or cancelled all debt owed them?
Imagine if the primary orientation of Christians was what others needed, not what they deserved.
Imagine Christians with no interest in protecting what they had.
Imagine Christians who made room for other beliefs, and honored the truths they found there.
Imagine Christians who saved their forgiveness and mercy for others, rather than saving it for themselves.
Whose empathy went first to the abused, not the abuser.
Who didn't see tax as theft; who didn't need to control distribution of public good to the deserving.
"If they start canceling these American presidents, they're gonna come after Bible characters next. Mark my words" -- Fox News "news side" host Bill Hemmer pic.twitter.com/qTPV0NERv8
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 19, 2021
Imagine if Christians actually sacrificed themselves for the good of those they considered their enemies, with no thought of any recompense or reward, but only to honor the essential humanity of all people.
Imagine if Christians sold all their possessions and gave it to the poor.
Imagine if they relentlessly stood up for the widow, the orphan, and the foreigner.
Imagine if they worshipped a God whose response to political power was to reject it.
Or cancelled all debt owed them?
Imagine if the primary orientation of Christians was what others needed, not what they deserved.
Imagine Christians with no interest in protecting what they had.
Imagine Christians who made room for other beliefs, and honored the truths they found there.
Imagine Christians who saved their forgiveness and mercy for others, rather than saving it for themselves.
Whose empathy went first to the abused, not the abuser.
Who didn't see tax as theft; who didn't need to control distribution of public good to the deserving.
