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.

Original poster

BBC wants 50% of LGBT staff to be “out”

138 replies

PPNC · 24/02/2021 18:12

The new BBC diversity plan wants at least 50% of LGBT staff to be “out” to their boss. AIBU to think this is regressive and insane?

Why should I (if I were both gay and worked at the BBC), say “hey boss person, I like shagging other women!”. Why are they asking instead of aiming for it not mattering who I choose to bump uglies with,
as it doesn’t affect my ability to do my job and is not really anybody else’s business?

Fully happy to be re-educated and told that A - the DM have read it wrong (as they are an agitator totally possible), or B - it’s essential for equality.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9295787/amp/BBCs-diversity-directive-Director-Tim-Davie-launches-bottom-shake-up.html

OP posts:
Jumpers268 · 24/02/2021 22:09

There are many openly gay people in my work. That's their choice. Management can assume I'm gay or straight. Couldn't care less. I'm all for people being able to be open if they CHOOSE to. And in any questionnaire given to me asking me my sexuality I would choose not to answer.

SimonJT · 24/02/2021 22:29

@PPNC

Because that seems to be exactly what the BBC are doing seemingly *@SimonJT* it was to emphasise how ill judged such a measure seems to be.

Being gay surely shouldn’t mean you get shoehorned into some form of identity, to me it literally means, as with Hetero or anything else, that you feel sexually attracted to the same sex/both sexes. Anything else surely means that you are being boxed or stereo typed by sexuality. Which is ridiculous!

It really doesn’t seem to be what the BBC is doing, it seems like your reductive views.
JellyBabiesFan · 24/02/2021 22:37

Looking forward to the BBC going subscription so I no longer have to pay for this bull shittery.

VashtaNerada · 24/02/2021 22:39

There are some odd comments on this thread! I think it’s good that the BBC wants to promote a workplace where people feel comfortable to talk about their sexual orientation if they want to. I do. I regularly mention DH to colleagues at work, talking about his job or holidays we’ve been on together. I’d like to think that if I had a DW instead that I could mention her with just as much ease! And as for how they know, there is anonymous monitoring data which they presumably cross reference with a staff survey.

LeopardFever · 24/02/2021 22:41

How will they ever be able to calculate it though? They would have to know who all of the gay people are in order to know if 50% of them are out. Which means that they'd know 100%. Idiotic.

RJnomore1 · 24/02/2021 22:42

How would you ever know 😳

Clymene · 24/02/2021 22:43

@SimonJT - can I ask why you're not telling your work colleagues you're getting married?

SimonJT · 24/02/2021 22:47

[quote Clymene]@SimonJT - can I ask why you're not telling your work colleagues you're getting married? [/quote]
I’d like to keep my job so I can pay my mortgage.

Significantown · 24/02/2021 22:52

I thought forcing your staff to out themselves was against the law?

Clymene · 24/02/2021 22:56

Oh god @SimonJT - that's awful.

I'm really shocked there are still actuaries that are like that. I work in professional services and we have openly lesbian and gay people at all levels of the business (including board level). I'm sorry to hear that some organisations are still so homophobic.

SmokedDuck · 24/02/2021 23:00

I hate it but feel through this constant drive to differentiate and be “careful” we are driving ourselves in the opposite direction. I know for absolute sure that’s my ex and my kids have faced far more racism now people feel pressured to be oh so very cautious about their privilege, than ever when it was a natural community rejection of outdated racist views and towards a more inclusive and fairer future.

This is a huge problem with these identity politics initiative. They tend to work to the opposite effect of reducing categorising people and even stereotyping, and end up making whatever characteristic some kind of identity locus, rather than just some unremarkable characteristic.

But the BBC is completely in thrall to critical theory all round.

Whammyyammy · 24/02/2021 23:02

I feel sorry for the mugs that actually fund the BBC with their licence 'fee' Grin

chomalungma · 24/02/2021 23:04

I wonder how many LGBT people who work at the Daily Mail feel safe coming out?

It's not a place I can imagine people who are 'different' would feel comfortable - but I say that purely by judging the articles it has in it and the messages it tries to say on its "War on woke"

Original poster
PPNC · 24/02/2021 23:08

How are my questions reductive?

OP posts:
SimonJT · 24/02/2021 23:09

@PPNC

How are my questions reductive?
“hey boss person, I like shagging other women!”
Pancake4life · 24/02/2021 23:11

it should be 100%
and its about creating a work environment where you don't need to think before remembering to lie and say "going out with a friend" or "partner" when someone at works asks if you're doing anything nice at the weekend when actually you mean your wife...
or about someone noticing the new engagement ring on your finger and asking how did he propose ?? and you having to awkwardly say "he did xxxx" whilst hating yourself for denying your gf exists.

Its painful not being able to be out at work and the more who can be comfortable doing so the better.. how on earth can this be seen as a negative..

Usagi12 · 24/02/2021 23:14

My boss has no right to know who I like to shag FFS.

CherryPieface · 24/02/2021 23:16

I would hope that I could talk openly about my sexual partner in my workplace - surely that’s not too much to hope for?

Original poster
PPNC · 24/02/2021 23:17

Already explained that one as explanatory.

But to be honest, what more is there to being gay than same sex attraction? What should we see being “gay/bi/lesbian” as other than preferred sexual attraction. That’s not reductive it’s fact.

Same as hetero can be reduced to opposite sex attraction.

OP posts:
SimonJT · 24/02/2021 23:19

@PPNC

Already explained that one as explanatory.

But to be honest, what more is there to being gay than same sex attraction? What should we see being “gay/bi/lesbian” as other than preferred sexual attraction. That’s not reductive it’s fact.

Same as hetero can be reduced to opposite sex attraction.

So do you see a partner as nothing more than someone you “shag”? Is a partner to you someone you have nothing but sexual attraction towards?
FrickinA · 24/02/2021 23:24

‘ But to be honest, what more is there to being gay than same sex attraction?’

That’s it? That all someone is to you then, someone you fancy? I’ve built a life with my wife, married her, had kids with her, and waited a very long time to do those things ( legally).
I’m not prepared to play the pronoun game to hide the fact I married a woman, not anymore and my professional career definitely suffered because of that.
It shouldn’t even be a thing, but it still is u unfortunately. And AIBUs like this prove, if anything, that the BBC is probably doing what’s long overdue.

Original poster
PPNC · 24/02/2021 23:25

No I see my chosen partner as a whole lot more than that, I see them as the human whose personality I care for.

But effectively that partners sexual attraction to me will on base level their sex right?

I can’t say anything about them as a person is dictated by their biological sex because otherwise I’m boxing them off. Unless there are “traits” that are shared by all gay people/straight people? Which would be typing.

The BBC aren’t asking what I care for in a human who would be my partner, they are asking what my sex based preference is. I see that as reductive about me, because it isn’t all that I am.

Not everyone wants to be defined by their sexual attraction, and nor should they be.

OP posts:
SimonJT · 24/02/2021 23:29

No I see my chosen partner as a whole lot more than that, I see them as the human whose personality I care for.

So do you know understand why your comments like “hey boss, I like shagging women” and “but to be honest, what more is there to being gay than same sex attraction?” are both reductive and offensive?

You describe your partner as a human who has a personality you care for. You’re referring to ours as nothing more than something to have sex with.

chomalungma · 24/02/2021 23:38

The world would be a much better place if it was like the people who live in Schitt's Creek.

No one batted an eyelid about David and Patrick.

Unfortunately we live in a world where people still sometimes have to hide who they are.

Original poster
PPNC · 24/02/2021 23:49

Same as hetero can be reduced to opposite sex attraction.

I can’t say anything about them as a person is dictated by their biological sex because otherwise I’m boxing them off. Unless there are “traits” that are shared by all gay people/straight people? Which would be typing.

Don’t be ridiculous, I also said ^^

If your approach to debate is to ignore direct questions, pick out select portions to make the whole meaningless, and avoid direct questions to you. Then it’s fairly pointless.

OP posts: