Rainbow badges at work - upset

[whatishappening123]

I work in a sector with vulnerable young people. A few years ago, we made the decision as a company to wear as part of our uniform, a name tag with the rainbow on as part of pledging our support to LGBT+
We have all received new name badges and for the first time ever- an option has been provided to have a red coloured one instead of the rainbow if staff 'do not agree with LGBT+'
I have raised this with HR and union and been told that staff are now allowed to choose and that is their right.
I feel really upset by this - colleagues I have known for years are now deciding against the rainbow badge.
We work with the most vulnerable- who are often LGBT. Some of our service users have asked staff directly why they are not using them- and they have lied saying " They'd run out , or the pin on the rainbow ones are crap, some staff are hiding the red ones.
It's not a majority by any means - it's probably about 11 staff in a staff of 60.
I just feel really really upset by it, but I can't quite put my finger on why.
I also don't understand how people can be 'against' LGBT
It's a protected characteristic.

This is nonsense, we shouldn’t be putting any kind of ideological preferences on ID used for work purposes. It’s unnecessary and imo unprofessional.

Why?

What does it cost you to wear a badge or put your pronouns at the end of your email?

What might it mean to someone who feels excluded, or that their identity isn't valued?

How much nicer, and more productive is a workplace where everyone feels included?

I can't keep up. What's the progress pride flag? Why is red the most homophonic colour? It's just a colour.

When I see people wearing a rainbow badge I assume they are LGBT+ themselves so I would prefer to wear a general one. It seems that the red badge is for that and is not an anti lgbt+ badge?

Totally agree. It’s absolutely ridiculous we’re paid to do a job not make ideological statements.

I’d refuse to wear any. No one needs to wear badges.

Virtue signalling nonsense. Thankfully the tide is turning. The performative rainbow flags are disappearing from the office too.

People so lacking in resilience that they are upset with badges should not work with vulnerable young people.

not wearing a rainbow badge does not exclude anyone; a plain badge neither includes, nor excludes any one group of people. It is, as it should be, merely a badge to identify that person to someone who needs to know who they are.

What would a rainbow badge, or email pronouns “cost” me? What if I don’t wish to signal ideological or political views in the workplace?

I work for the NHS and don’t wear the rainbow lanyard because I don’t feel that my beliefs or opinions should affect my ability to do my job.

I do not need a badge or lanyard to represent my beliefs.

Edited to get on my soap box. What are you doing for the people that you feel that you are showing support for other than sticking some pretty rainbow on your name badge? What do you personally do to support the LBQT community?

It might be difficult to get your head around someone being non-binary if you have a strong ID as a man or a woman. But just because you haven't experienced something, and don't have the empathy to be able to imagine it it doesn't mean it's ridiculous.

People think it is ridiculous as no one identifies totally with regressive sex stereotypes associated with their sex. We just don’t exist in a belief system where we think certain behaviours and personality traits must be male or female so if you exhibit both (as everyone does) you are somehow special and ‘nonbinary’. I also object to the idea that if I don’t identify as ‘nonbinary’ I must be happy to identify with the very expectations that oppress women.

Imagine thinking compelled support is of any value whatsoever.

why would it matter if they’re doing their job. Why are we making people’s sexuality their identity. Do your job, be a good colleague and everyone will be happy.

I think you are being unreasonable. For example, staff who work at Church of England schools are not guilted into wearing a crucifix - so in the same vein your colleagues shouldn't be condemned for wearing a red badge.

I think the idea of a rainbow badge in the first place was ridiculous.

I'm not missing the point, the point was that the earlier poster keeps stating as fact that women are still vulnerable to trans when in prison when this is not the case. But that poster also openly promotes anti queer pedophilia conspiracy theories which, as a queer man, is incredibly offensive and dangerous.

Really?! It’s just such an obtuse viewpoint given so few people consider themselves trans.

YANBU OP - the trans debates are going to be at the root of most of it, I should think the majority of people are supportive of homosexuality these days (thankfully!).

All you can do it wear yours with pride and challenge colleagues. They’re entitled to their views but you can certainly ask them about it, maybe it’ll open their eyes a little.

I feel mixed about this.

OTOH I don't think anyone should be forced to express views they don't hold.

OTOH I share your discomfort and your view that why would anyone be against it.

Is the red really about being AGAINST or just not being FOR?

Either way, particularly given the sector you work in I don't blame you for feeling upset.

I would too, because I would care about the young people I work with and would be distressed at the thought that maybe some of them weren't being fully accepted by some colleagues.

Do you have decent equality and diversity training / safeguards to ensure everyone is behaving decently and the young people can complain and be heard if they need to?

If so, I'd be less concerned than if not.

And the end of the day the important thing is that they ALL get good quality support.

Exactly this!

I had a work colleague try to report me to my LM because I refused to put she/her on my email signature. Thankfully my LM agreed I did not have to and the policy was optional!

Times moved on, the tide has turned.

No one believes in ‘be kind’ any more, well not many people do. Men can identify however they want but we will not be part of the role play.

Women are not going to put up with being called 'pregnant people' or 'people with ovaries’
We will not stand by and see our children sent down a medical path that can’t be reversed.
We are not 'cis' women, we are not a subset of our own sex class.
Women will not be silenced into accepting biological men into our rape trauma centres.
We will not move over and let biological men take away our sporting achievements.
We will not have our designated board places taken up by more biological men however they identify.
And we most certainly will not put ourselves at great risk than the already dreadful statistics (1 in 4 of assaulted by men in our lifetime), however those men identify they can stay out of single sex spaces.

It starts with pronouns and I for one will not be part of it.

Unless you’re going to wear nine badges, representing each of the nine protected characteristics, you are not including everyone. Which, presumably <in your world> is not “nice”.

Why should people need everyone else to wear a badge to feel 'included'?

It's only ever particular groups that get this level of input, anyway. And it's totally performative. My friend who's disabled would love to feel more included, but it's not badges he needs, it's ramps and accessible spaces.

Just treat everyone with appropriate respect. No need for silly badges, which only seem to be causing problems here anyway.

Not everyone wants to virtue signal - doesn't mean they're against the movement. How dramatic.

Can you quote where in the Equality Act 2010 it lists LGBT as a protected characteristic?

Sexuality/sexual orientation is a protected characteristic, but it isn’t specifically L, G, or B. Someone could claim to have been discriminated against due to being heterosexual, pansexual, etc.

Gender reassignment is a notably separate protected characteristic (so there is very much not one LGBT protected characteristic). This characteristic does generally cover transgender people, although there may be some people who consider themselves transgender or whom others would regards as falling within the “trans umbrella” that this would not cover. For example, cross dressers were considered by Stonewall to fall under the “trans umbrella” until relatively recently. Gender reassignment as a protected characteristic would not apply to them if they have not transitioned/are not currently transitioning/have no plans to transition.

But again, feel free to quote where in the equality act 2010 it lists LGBT as a protected characteristic.

It is ridiculous though. No one is “binary”. We are not walking sex stereotypes.

I wouldn't want to wear a LGBT rainbow badge - not because I'm against LGBT people having human rights or being treated with dignity and respect. Has anyone at your work espoused such a view, @whatishappening123 (?!)

I don't understand why your employer privileges LGBT above every other minoritised group. Presumably your badge isn't also adorned with symbols indicating allyship for every other group with protected characteristics, characteristics which presumably are represented amongst your clients?

And there you have it OP, welcome to 2025 Britain.

How did we get here? 😔

YANBU.