Key things to say to a head of inclusion sponsor

I don't remotely get the impression the OP wants to report you and have your posts deleted WhittyWhatNow. Far better for us all to be able to read everyone's contributions for ourselves and come to our own conclusions about their value to the discussion.

If you feel there is a personal attack in any of the replies to you OP then do report it to mnhq. They frown on that sort of thing.

Meanwhile, this sounds a lot like what your comments may have felt like at the dinner, passing uninvited judgement on a workplace and role you have no direct connection with or knowledge of at all.

But you aren’t going to listen and you know better even though you weren’t there.

@Thethingswedoforlove
You were brave and principled.
Whether you decide to take it further or not, rest assured that you did the right thing.

As previous posters have said, equality and diversity is about balance. All protected characteristics are equally important. This friend of your husband seems not to realise that. Also, he is ignorant of the law. There is a clear definition of "woman" in the EA2010, underlined by case law and in the recent speech of the former AG. He really, really should be au fait with the most important piece of legislation in his field. His failings will have real consequences for women and gender critical people in his organisation. You've actually done him a favour, even if he doesn't appreciate it!

There isn’t going to be a further conversation. People don’t seek out more time with the dinner party guest who critiqued their professional role and challenged their expertise as a light chat with the starters.

Exactly this. You’re having a meal with friends, you question someone who has achieved a senior position in their role and has lived experience as a member of the lgbtq+ community, alongside working closely with a trans woman, you assume that you speak for women in his company, suggest he’s breaking the law and can’t do his job, and generally sound like you made the meal uncomfortable for everyone, and you think the guy owes you something?

maybe asking him how his workplace have handled any issues raised by the recent stonewall media stories might have been a more open and collaborative way to exude an actual conversation?

Stonewall is toxic, and its now actively homophobic. And I say that as a middle aged gay person.

People still clinging to what it was 30 years ago before it went completely batshit need to open their eyes. And realise that those less generous and balanced than the OP could have smartly reported him to HR for his open prejudice and offensive language, if not opened up a legal case. The political lobby the chap seems in thrall to would not hesitate to have caused as much harm as possible if they were in the OPs position.

I think you were perfectly entitled to give your opinion - although I agree with some previous posters that Stonewall is seen as sacred among lots of middle-aged gay men and lesbians. I've noticed that there are plenty, often non-parents and not working in education or anything to do with safeguarding, who just have no idea about what's been going on, and still think of Stonewall as the force for good it used to be. So he might well have felt defensive at your use of 'toxic'. On the other hand, we don't force people to wear kid gloves on other topics ('bloody tories/bloody brexit etc) so it does feel rather hypocritcal to be so defensive on this subject.

I agree with Beamur, (first hand grenade of a renegade thought) who said that when somebody with whom you align on many issues says something which has never occured to you, you think - oh, maybe they have a point? and the idea slowly takes shape in your head - maybe not for this chap directly, I wouldn't bother talking to him, but perhaps for your old friend?

Dinner parties don’t usually involve someone you just met telling you you’re doing your job wrong and they’d like to chat over lunch about how they think you’re breaking the law.

Can you maybe see that this was totally inappropriate to go into in this situation?

If my partner’s childhood mate, who knows nothing about me and my work and professional life, challenged my expertise like that I can’t imagine we’d choose their company ever again.

Seriously rude, no matter how justified you feel. You can’t possibly know enough about his work or the organisation to comment in that way, and an unsolicited judgement at a dinner party is bound to make everyone uncomfortable and embarrassed for you.

If my husband called a friend (well anyone) a nasty name I’d go mad.

Such nastiness always from the ‘bekind’ brigade.

I feel hurt for you, OP. Your good friend's husband showed you disrespect, diminished your expertise, and called you names. I imagine you might even worry a bit that your friend is dominated by his husband in an unhealthy way. This man could have simply said, "I'm not sure I could agree with you. Let's chat another time." But he had to insult you in front of your friends. He's a misogynistic jerk.

Or dare him to do a guaranteed 100% anonymous and see what happens. He might ‘be educated’.

Since you raised the issue, if he wants to convince you, that is a great opportunity for a reasoned discussion surely? Debate is a first step.

Bollocks, bloody phone! Should read: The organisation isn't being...

But the organising isn't betting LGBT inclusive, just T inclusive, which isn't the same thing.

The law is the law and it's quite clear that it's supposed to be applied in the same way, protecting those who have any of the 9 protected characteristics from discrimination due to those characteristics.

He is incapable of having a conversation about women's rights without resorting to verbal abuse.

The point of equality law is that it protected everyone, not just those who have enough power and confidence to stand up for themselves.

He sounds clueless and a liability to the company.

Well done, OP, for trying. I don't blame you for not feeling up to another round of it.

OP thank you for being brave and raising this. I’m sorry you were insulted as a result, that is unacceptable at any level, but even more so from someone whose professional role legally includes ensuring that GC views are protected in his organisation. Unlike some posters, I can see why his female colleagues may not feel able to raise this! It has been well reported that Stonewall are issuing poor legal advice, any DEI professional should be up to speed with this, you were doing him a favour by pointing it out.
Anyone who thinks this is not appropriate should consider what their response would be if OP were challenging racist attitudes, and why they think women deserve less consideration than other protected groups?

As a side note, if the manager is question were displaying anti-trans views, I imagine many on this board would also challenge that. All discrimination is wrong, it’s a shame some of our posters don’t share that view

I would at least mention that he threw an offensive slur at you - what would he do if one colleague threw a slur at another colleague?

OP I'd ignore this comment tbh. Women who speak up about being silenced are now routinely harrassed, verbally assaulted and sometimes fired. If anyone thinks we can assume that women can speak up for themselves then they don't, or don't want to, understand just how dangerous and toxic it currently is to talk about women's rights.