Women’s network being replaced by Gender Network - AIBU?

[Thriftnugget]

The company I work for has had a Women’s Network for a few years (there is also a Disability Network and a BAME network). The purpose is to bring together people who experience inequalities in the workplace to help the company improve workplace equality. As you would expect you have to be female to join the Women’s Network. Now we have been told that the Women’s Network is to change to a “Gender Network “ The idea, I am told, is that by opening the space to “other genders” (my inverted commas) the agenda will be accelerated by promoting knowledge sharing and collaboration.
I am deeply disappointed and also frustrated at the irrational change to a grouping constituted to support women to share common experiences and work together. Be great to get views.

Maybe it's worth reminding them that sex is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act as is Pregnancy and Maternity (which are only experienced by women). I'd say that women experience discrimination due to their sex and will share common experiences due to their sex and so a Women's Network is essential.

I would ask if the Disability Network and BAME Network are going to be merged with the new Gender Network to facilitate "knowledge sharing and collaboration".

If the answer is no, then why are they behaving in a discriminatory manner by recognising the needs of people with some protected characteristics but not others?

Suggest that anyone currently feeling unrepresented, could be supported in setting up a new network ("gender" - whatever the fuck that means - but also a LGB network or a network for members of different faith groups).

It seems a bit pointless; if it's a 'gender' network, presumably that means anyone can join, but there's no inherent purpose to such a group - it's a work group ... for people who work there.

They should keep the women's network and if they want to set up a network for both sexes, give it a specific purpose - knowledge sharing network, career development network, whatever they want it to achieve. Also, nothing to stop them setting up a men's network.

No, no, no and they can fuck off.

I assume you’re a civil servant. We had this forced on us a couple of years ago. Nobody appeared to be bothered, at least outwardly. So disappointing.

Why don't you ask what advantage that will bring to the group? Put them on the spot to answer that question very specifically with examples. Ask what they are trying to achieve or who they are trying to include that is currently excluded with the current set up. And if this is to change does it still meet the original mandate the group was set out to achieve? Ie if it's now a watered-down version then perhaps it should be abolished or another group set up to meet whatever is currently lacking so it doesn't take away from the current group. Ask very specific question and wait for them to give satisfactory answers.

Im a civil servant and same here. I left after it was made clear that this wasnt going to change. Periodically I get asked why I'm not in the network and I just say something like - "I prefer to support women in more direct ways in the workplace".

We have a women’s network that anyone can join. In fact anyone can join all the networks we have. Sometimes it helps having allies, especially in the industry I work in.

Entirely agree with this. My profession is male dominated and for a while we've had a women's mentoring scheme. Recently it was announced that anyone who identified as female would now qualify and could be mentored by anyone who identifies as any gender. My initial reaction was exactly the same - what is generalising it like this meant to achieve over the old scheme? I don't disagree that people who weren't born female who now identity as such may well need support but it needs to be targeted - same as in your case, @Thriftnugget.

I'm in IT, in a particularly male dominated area of it.

I stopped doing anything for the women's network at my previous company when it became the womxn's network. (I had previously been very involved with organisation.)

My current employer has a women's and a men's network. There are other various other employee groups as well. The men have talked about stuff like domestic violence where men are the victims, and toxic masculinity.

@CrownCoats no, actually not, a charity, but I think this is an idea picked up from the civil service. And I’m afraid it could be the same- mostly the membership will appear unbothered which makes me even more sad. Hoping I will be wrong.

@cariadlet @Tbrh Yes, I will follow your advice and get really specific with the questions I want to hear answered. And the rebuttals I will further respond with. Thank you for the tactical advice.

@Coali In this case there appears to be no proposal that other groups constituted to provide spaces for groups with Protected Characteristics will be required to admit a broader range of individuals- only the Women’s Network. Ally groups and projects are fine, I think, but this change seems to effectively dismantle the Women’s Network.

@SwanOfThoseThings Completely agree, thanks for helping me to articulate!!

This!

Today's Supreme Court judgement should really help anyone wanting to challenge these stupid, misogynistic decisions.

@cariadlet Today’s news was wonderful but sadly I don’t think it will change this particular decision- today I received further information about the organisation ADI people think that promoting equality will be better advanced by inviting men into the sex equality community. There is so much muddled and unclear thinking being presented that it’s difficult to know where to start in trying to challenge it. But I’m not giving up. If anyone knows of any organisation that has considered a similar move but then decided to stick with a Women’s Network I’d be very grateful to hear about that: I’m being presented with examples of evidence elsewhere to show that it’s the progressive way to go…..🙄

Could you try asking if they have carried out an Equality Impact Assessment?

Excellent idea, @cariadlet

Can you start your own women’s network for people who still want to have one? They’ve changed the existing one - but that doesn’t mean you can’t start a new one

@NineLivesKat The existing Women’s Network is afforded time and resources by the organisation which is very unlikely to be given to another one when they’ve decided that a “Gender Network” is the way forward . Personally I’m pursuing a work related qualification currently and really can’t take on anything extra but I think that’s not really the key reason why a new one isn’t the answer.

Hi OP, did you get anywhere with this? My workplace has done the same, and like you I can’t think where to begin with challenging it. Grateful for any advice.

It’s particularly annoying as by far the most widespread discrimination in the U.K. is maternity discrimination. That’s probably why!!

We had a women's network, it was great. Then it was rebranded to a balance network so as not to exclude anyone by the use of the word woman, despite it always having been open to men as allies. Then they decided there needed to be a men's network, the launch of which was announced on an international women's day event.

So now there is no women's network, but there is a men's, despite it being women who get the raw end of the gender pay gap deal. The men's one is headed up by someone who I know has bullied a female in the workplace for being female. I wish I was making this up.