Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Workplace definition of sex/gender - advice?

30 replies

whoknowswhyanyonedoesanything · 27/07/2020 22:25

Hi all. I'm looking for a bit of advice.

At my organisation, information about a recent innovation/scheme described as for women/females and intended to be of specific benefit to them (think of issues that impact on women in the workplace in an institutionalised sexism way) finished by also stating it was 'inclusive' in its definition of women to include trans women and non-binary.

I think they have their definitions wrong. I think it defeats the purpose of the original intention of the scheme. I feel uncomfortable about it and want to say something. But is this a 'putting my head above the parapet' situation? I feel a bit sick at the prospect of speaking up tbh. Should I? And how should I - what should I say? Or am I on the wrong track?

Sorry don't want to go into too much detail and have name changed (actually registered again because forgot password, such a long time lurker) for this.

Many thanks for any advice if you can with this limited info!

OP posts:
Viletta · 27/07/2020 23:22

How this can harm? Sorry I don't understand your concern..

MajesticWhine · 27/07/2020 23:20

It is scary sticking your neck out in a scenario like this. I wonder if it's worth it for you. It might depend on your organisation. Where I work I wouldn't dare. Maybe cowardly but I like my job.

Would the scheme being inclusive of transwomen take away some of the benefits for females? For example a limited number of places in the scheme or something like top female employee of the month a la Pips Bunce.
If so it seems reasonable to point the unfairness if it. But it may go down badly or seen as "not being kind"

Thelnebriati · 27/07/2020 23:19

They have to go by the legal definition. So they mean sex. If they want to include trans people, they must have a Gender Recognition Certificate.

Otherwise it isn't for women and they can't claim it is.

Original poster
whoknowswhyanyonedoesanything · 27/07/2020 23:02

So true, thanks. That's what I mean I suppose - it's like all meaning is taken out of the (good) intention.

OP posts:
StillWeRise · 27/07/2020 22:47

I'd be saying-
but surely it's transMEN we need to include in this scheme, they are the ones likely to have suffered XYZ