Please help me word this for work! 'Gender' not 'womens network'

[Supergel1]

We have a bunch of 'diversity' networks at my job. No womens network however. I raised this when I joined and was told the 'gender' network was for this and so called to be more inclusive... We have a separate pride network that has done loads on 'gender' and trans pride and pronouns etc.

They've just set out their purpose and priorities for the year and there isn't a single mention of the word women or woman or female but there's a whole priority (one of just three) to encourage 'male colleagues' to sign up to the network as 'allies'.

I fed back some time ago that while I recognised the group was trying to be inclusive actually it is just wishy washy and failing to address any challenges for women.

I want to explain this in a public forum because I bet I'm not the only one that thinks this is bollocks but what should I actually say beyond 'I'm disappointed women don't get a mention in the purpose or priorities despite sex based discrimination and issues being a real thing and sex being a protected characteristic'. What can I say without coming across as anti gender?

At the moment purpose is all about all genders having access to opportunities, open discussions for awareness around gender issues, challenging biases, gender equality, challenging our practices... Etc etc.

Please help me with actual words!

Could you start with statistics? Eg the pay gap and other disparities between the sexes. Then include the unique obstacles women face eg majority of childcare, housework, mental load, bias both conscious and unconscious.

Another example would be working from home which suits women better because of domestic role but could be a disadvantage for several reasons.

The need for women to network and the importance of female role models and mentors.

The importance of mutual support such as sexual harassment and domestic violence which are currently being tackled with workplace initiatives by the government.

Aaarghhhh 😱😱😱😱

This p's me right off. We had a "Women in Operations" group at work (wokey public organisation that has a lot of staff out on construction sites and in remote countryside all day) . As women, we did some amazing work - got disposable sanitary bins in work welfare bags, better fitting PPE, ran some aweneness stuff in schools about some of our female plant operators... but now we have to be part of "Equality in Operations", and anyone in EinO should be invited to our meetings. Whilst I invite sympathetic support, I can guarantee that we would have had the amazing, honest, hilarious conversation we had about managing periods in the field, if we'd had men- of any minority - in the room. Oddly, all the other networks representing protected characteristics still also have characteristic-specific groups.

Thank you both. Stuff to bear in mind.

Can’t you start an informal group for women? Breakfast coffee before work? Lunch once a month?

I meant to write "work welfare vans".

The local leaf of our "women's" group is investigating with our Head Office why we can't have a women only space.

We had a Women's Network in our dept, which then got changed to a Gender Network for similar reasons as you have been told. I couldn't get anyone to see sense so I just left in the end. I've found it more useful to seek out individual mentors of senior women that I admire or want to learn from.

A lot of women left our group for the same reasons.

I joined the mentoring network as a mentee deliberately to provide a route for 1:1 mentoring, but I think it's really important for in such a make dominated field as construction to nurture that peer support group.

Your post is so important as it illustrates exactly why women's networks are necessary. (Although I do think it is important to remind men about biology and periods are likely to be the thing they are most squeamish about. So a reminder is often quite appropriate!).

But this, or similar for other posters - surely becomes your main argument in favour: "the other networks representing protected characteristics still also have characteristic-specific groups." Protected characteristics as we all know on here are part of UK legislation. No director should be wanting potential breaches of legislation. And to have protected characteristic groups for all but one pc is as close to discrimination as you get.

No problem, would be happy to give feedback on a draft.

Someone should make a Sex Network.

Generally I think people should focus on doing their jobs and worry less about Networks however.

In my last workplace we had a Women's Initiative which seemed to run endless sessions to discuss the issues holding women back from further advancement and how difficult and depressing these issues were. Or so-called inspirational speakers with be kind messages. Without exception every single event made me feel worse about being a senior women in a male industry. Nothing was ever done to address the issues we discussed, I always felt like the women were just expected to toughen up and work around the issues. One of many reasons I ended up leaving ...