The survey which gave me identity confusion; and the identity-loving councillor who wants to be mayor.
I recently got an email from the Christchurch City Council (NZ), asking if I would participate in a survey of their decision-making processes. It was sent to me because I had made a written (and oral) submission to them on their ‘Equity and Inclusion Policy’, so I was on their list of those who had engaged with them in this way.
Besides being a thorn in their side about their policies of allowing men with identity issues into female spaces in Council-owned venues, I also try to be a good(ish) citizen in other ways. I admit I drag my arse about that last bit at times, but I also believe in getting off that same arse occasionally, both physically and metaphorically, and doing something besides moaning about the state of things.
The email from the Council said:
“Christchurch City Council wants your views on our decision making processes. It is part of our programme that gives residents and customers a say on how the Council is performing.
As someone who has used the Council's governance function in the last 12 months, we want to hear your views to help improve this service. This includes appearing at a hearing or making a deputation to Council, committees or community board meetings, or making a submission.
It will take about three minutes to complete and all answers given will be made anonymous so you won’t be identified.”
It didn’t sound too onerous, so I decided to give it a bash, but got stuck when I got to being asked how I identified -
I mean, I know that I’m a biological woman, but I’d never thought about how I identified. I just am a woman. However, for the purposes of this survey, reality didn’t appear to be a requirement. It seemed the Council was okay with me choosing any one of those options to “identify as”. There was no indication that a temporary identity wasn’t allowed, so I could have truthfully chosen anything on the list for the purposes of the survey, and then changed it again afterwards, with no deception involved.
Notably, the more traditional choices of ‘male’ and ‘female’ were replaced with “A man” and “A woman”. I guess it’s a bit tricky to ask whether we’re male or female now, as it might indicate a truthful answer was desired about one’s biology. Imagine the hurt feelings which could arise in the breasts of those who think denying their biology is a human right!
Eventually, I decided to return to the survey, and pick the identity which suited me in the moment. With any luck there’d be a section at the end which asked for other input, and I could use that to tell them how confusing it was to be asked how I identify, with no ‘when, where, how, why’ guidelines. However, it was a one-chance only survey, and when I went back to it, I’d lost that chance.
Of course, it came from a no-reply email address. Perhaps I could have rung the Council and asked for it to be sent to me again, but I just couldn’t see that as having the word ‘easy’ in it.
Like many public institutions these days, the Christchurch City Council is saturated with wokery. As far as the councillors go, not all are on board with it, but Councillor Sara Templeton, who wants to be mayor¹, is an absolute devotee. She led the panel who created the Equity and Inclusion Policy, which refused to include the word ‘sex’ in it. According to Councillor Templeton, the word ‘gender’ in the list of those whom the Council “recognises and values” in the policy can mean ‘sex’, too, although she also acknowledges it’s not always the same thing. What that word means on any given day is up to who’s interpreting it. It’s as loose and changeable as asking us how we identify.
When I watched the video of the Council discussing the ‘Equity and Inclusion Policy’, prior to voting on it, Councillor Templeton was asked by the mayor to address some questions raised about why the word ‘sex’ wasn’t included in the policy. In that address, she said “Our rainbow community, especially those who are transgender, are some of the most vulnerable and victimised in our community”. It’s clear that the word ‘sex’ is seen by her as a threat to having nothing stand in the way of any man who says he’s a woman gaining free and unfettered entry into all female spaces in Council-owned venues.
Now, Councillor Templeton, who prioritises the wants of men with identity issues over women, is going to run for mayor. If Christchurch’s citizens don’t want this, they must turn up to vote against it. Remember the saying: ‘those who turn up run the world’.
¹Sara Templeton’s mayoral bid —who’s supporting her, and who’s not? - Chris Lynch Media
Sigh. I too would have a problem stating my "identity" on a survey. If it was a parenting survey, I might say that I identify as a mother; on an employment survey, a midwife, but really, I don't "identify" as anything, like you I just AM a whatever. For me, these days, an identity rings of a falsehood being perpetrated because well, anyone can identify as whatever they choose. Well, that is unless us NZers of European heritage claim a Maori identity; somehow, I doubt that one will fly very far, even though there is no logical reason why some dude with a beard and a penis can claim to be a woman, while I can't claim a Maori identity. (Which is fair enough because Maori is not a costume any more than woman is.)
It appears to be even worse in Spain, where in the blink of an eye any natal male can suddenly become a woman without doing one single thing to even appear to look like one.
It is important to realize that there can be no fraud about your sex declaration under Spanish law, since the law is based on self-perception and contains no requirements. So that obviously male person sitting and watching the girls getting into their swimsuits in the public pool change rooms? Yup, nothing to stop that guy with his hard-on sitting there all day as long as he utters those magic words: “I am a woman”.
Cynically, many Spanish men have stated the reason for their “sex change” is to grant them access to special accommodations made for women in what is known as a culture that favors male success over female accomplishments. So as in sporting competitions, men are more than prepared to cheat their way to positions designed to benefit women. Also, the penalties for domestic violence are heavier for men than for women, so hey presto, violent “women” with penises face lesser punishments if convicted.
Coming soon to a city near you?
Templeton fails the 'fit for purpose' test. She denies sex. She exists in a cult fantasy world. She asks concerned citizens not to email her with facts and in the hearing of submissions on the Equity and Inclusion policy she made no provision for recording the orsl objections...luckily it was done by submitters. I know I was emsiled by her. I was at the oral submissions.