Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Trans issue at work

389 replies

NooneToldMeItWasRaining · 10/10/2019 19:04

I work with someone that is a trans activist and while i support their right to identify as they wish, I don't subscribe to the philosophy that you should be able
to change your biological sex on your birth certificate or that gender stereotypes define who you are as a person.

I really like this person, but i struggle with their outspoken views e.g. that transwomen should participate in women's sport and to say otherwise is hateful, that some women have penises, that she is a lesbian (they are a transwoman in a relationship with a biological woman) and trying to get us to add pro nouns to our emails.

I haven't said anything and I do like her, but I am struggling with these outspoken views so at odds with my own beliefs (and common sense!). I don't want to add sodding pro nouns to my email!!

Is there any way of politely refuting any of this stuff or do I have to sit and smile and nod along

OP posts:
woodchuck99 · 11/10/2019 10:03

Given that one of the "huge issue reasons" is that you can literally be charged by the police for making one mis-statement by accident, and its not the most relaxing workplace environment.

If anyone has been charged it will because the mis-statement" was far from an accident.

The OP's boss shouldn't be bringing their personal life into their work.

No they shouldn't which is why it should be very easy for OP to ignore.

squishee · 11/10/2019 10:04

I don't understand this pronoun thing. Such pronouns are, by definition, used to refer to someone or their attributes/possessions in the third person, so when they are not there. It's just a way to avoid repeating their name the whole time. So why does anyone feel the need to control someone else's conversation that they are not part of?

QualCheckBot · 11/10/2019 10:10

If anyone has been charged it will because the mis-statement" was far from an accident.

Well, intent and mens rea can be proven by recklessness, so that's not accurate.

But the prospect of being investigated by the police in your workplace for suddenly snapping and saying something potentially illegal on this one issue is a daunting one. Because other issues aren't treated like this. The police are not going to be called if the solicitor is mistaken for the secretary.

No they shouldn't which is why it should be very easy for OP to ignore.

The onus should be on the other person to avoid bringing their personal lives into the workplace. That's classical common law duty of the employer to provide a safe working environment and competent and safe co-workers, which hasn't been properly thought through in this context. And this is one area where legislation has not been brought in to codify the common law duties, so they still form part of employment law in all other working contexts.

suggestionsplease1 · 11/10/2019 10:11

*The intersex people that I work with (in the main) find your descriptors offensive, and do not consider that they are 'disordered'.

Oh give over.

If you really are so well-read and deeply involved as you claim, then you would know full well that "DSD" has routinely and long been known as "disorders of sex development"; and not some personal slight made up by MrG for the purposes of this thread.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorders_of_sex_development

That's not to say it can't or won't change over time; but to try and insinuate malice where none is intended (and in fact has been deliberately avoided by using these standard terms and not older more pejorative terms), you are being utterly ridiculous.*

I know well how the acronym DSD has been used and is still used thanks. I was simply reporting that many of the people I work with dislike being thought of as having a disorder - they do not consider themselves as having a disorder.

I guess that's a question of identity as well - does your right to say they have a disorder (and I acknowledge many medical expert would agree with you) trump their right to identify as having a difference of sexual development instead?

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 11/10/2019 10:13

So why does anyone feel the need to control someone else's conversation that they are not part of?

It is an authoritarian mind set, which is why it should not be pandered to.

Free speech is the foundation of all other freedoms, without it we have nothing, that's why totalitarian regimes always try to control language.

Trans ideology is highly authoritarian.

Pandaintheporridge · 11/10/2019 10:16

batbixen did you read the post a few before yours from the woman who now has to change at work with a trans women who has not had surgery? If TRA is seen as a threat, it is because of the pushing back of women's identity and boundaries that this involves. I can't think of another equality group that requires a different group changes their own identity.

ethelfleda · 11/10/2019 10:18

So why does anyone feel the need to control someone else's conversation that they are not part of?

This is what I don’t get. Why does it matter so much??

Themyscira · 11/10/2019 10:21

Do not underestimate the deep, pervasive and strong need for control.

Pronouns are rohypnol.

fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

CecilyP · 11/10/2019 10:24

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

OnlyTheTitOfTheIceberg · 11/10/2019 10:31

I have to work with people who have all kinds of views I find offensive and can't agree with. I move on.

If I disagree about Brexit, I won't be in danger of being disciplined for being Leavist.

If I disagree about religion, I won't be in danger of being disciplined for being atheist.

If I disagree about politics, I won't be in danger of being disciplined for being Conservatist.

But if I disagree that a man can become a woman, I would be in danger of being disciplined for being transphobic.

The level of organisational capture this movement representing a tiny minority (well, originally - under Stonewall's trans umbrella the world and his dog are now trans) has achieved is breathtaking...and breathtakingly scary for what it means in terms of forced speech and removal of women's rights to sex-segregated spaces.

NiceLegsShameAboutTheFace · 11/10/2019 10:32

This is becoming an ever bigger issue in the workplace. It's delicate. I can only give my own points of view on the matter, which are:

  • if someone asks to be referred to as he or she, I will do my best to remember that and to do so.
  • if someone is dealing with me directly in correspondence, they would refer to me in the second person (you): no issues there.
  • I will not be adding pronouns to my email signature. To me it's presumptuous in that I'm recommending how others should refer to me. How they refer to me is entirely up to them. He. She. The gobby woman from Finance. That's their call.

The trans issue is of great interest to me on the macro level, by which I mean ensuring safe spaces for women. The twattery around pronouns? Haven't got a fuck to give.

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 11/10/2019 10:36

Why does it matter so much??

It matters because they want to control your perception of them. It isn't enough that you don't discriminate, you must believe.

ethelfleda · 11/10/2019 10:45

Themyscira

Just read that article you linked to. Verrrrry interesting.

HollowTalk · 11/10/2019 10:45

If I was at work and emailing someone I'd never met called Sam or Alex, I can't think why I'd need to know whether they were male or female. What does that have to do with anything?

And it's all about the men, isn't it? Men pleasing themselves and making it legal to gaslight women, and some women acting like handmaidens to men.

OneSliceIsNeverEnough · 11/10/2019 10:51

I had an issue with a colleague who went from being a close chum, planning our weddings together, to her walking through the workplace shouting OOOHHHH JEREMY CORBYN. Whatever my position on old Jezza it was a bit much. A lot much. I feel for you.

woodchuck99 · 11/10/2019 11:07

But with most things people disagree about, even brexit, everyone is entitled to express their view. Whereas with this, he is expressing his view, seemingly at great length, while OP doesn’t feel free to say anything.

Well no. You are also not entitled to express a view that is homophobic, or racist either. Ultimately it is best to just get on with you work rather than spending your time discussing things which are nothing to do with work.

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2019 11:11

The trouble is that any hint of disagreement or reluctance (aka "denying their identity") can be and has been constructed as constituting an "unsafe space" by the most vexatious trans warriors. So it's not necessarily possible or wise to say "we'll agree to disagree" depending on the nature of the person.

ChattyLion · 11/10/2019 11:13

for some reason only this is a huge issue

Because this issue massively affects women’s and children’s privacy, safety, dignity, safeguarding, and a lot of other things. Yes lots of the more misogynistic religious or cultural beliefs would have those effects too, but those haven’t been adopted by major national institutions and workplaces as unquestionable truth, which is what has happened in recent years with gender ideology.

nauticant · 11/10/2019 11:13

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2019 11:14

Well no. You are also not entitled to express a view that is homophobic, or racist either.

What is your comparison here? Do you think it's equal to racism or homophobia to believe know that a man is not a woman? What has the OP suggested that's verboten? And no one I know silently works for 8 hours and then goes home. Where do you work? Hmm

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2019 11:15

It is bullying, as the colleague is leveraging their personal power over the OP.

BuzzShitbagBobbly · 11/10/2019 11:16

But with most things people disagree about, even brexit, everyone is entitled to express their view. Whereas with this, he is expressing his view, seemingly at great length, while OP doesn’t feel free to say anything.

Well no. You are also not entitled to express a view that is homophobic, or racist either.

Are you suggesting that simply not agreeing with this person's POV puts OP in the same league as being racist or homophobic?

By which I can only assume you mean you think OP would be transphobic (or some other similarly negative attribute) for disagreeing?

Perhaps you would clarify your comment?

woodchuck99 · 11/10/2019 11:17

Why are you suggesting the OP is looking to respond with comments akin to those which are homophobic, or racist?

I'm not suggesting she is. I am responding to the argument that this is a unique situation and that people can say whatever they like about other topic without being in danger of being disciplined.

woodchuck99 · 11/10/2019 11:18

Perhaps you would clarify your comment?

See above.

nauticant · 11/10/2019 11:19

You're equating a lack of belief in this gender identity ideology with racism or homophobia. That's pretty unpleasant.