'Gender identity' and discrimination

[FurryGiraffe]

I have just been sent a link to a survey my employer is running on gender discrimination (I'm an academic and its a university survey in conjunction with the institution's Athena Swan charter renewal). It repeatedly uses the terminology of 'gender identity': asking whether I have suffered discrimination (in a variety of contexts) because of my 'gender identity' and then asking what my 'gender identity' is. Nowhere does it mention discrimination on the basis of biological sex, or what my biological sex is. And I am hopping mad at the potential that this has to conceal the issues.

I haven't suffered discrimination on the basis of my gender identity. I have suffered discrimination on the basis of my biological sex, insofar as I have twice lost out on career progression opportunities as a result of being on maternity leave. But a survey that concentrates on 'gender identity' isn't going to identify pregnancy and childbirth as a cause of gender identity based discrimination, is it? Because natal males identifying as female don't become pregnant and natal females who identify as male do (or at least can), so from a gender identity perspective, pregnancy is not a root cause of discrimination, is it? Meanwhile, a very real cause of discrimination against women will go unidentified because we are asking the wrong question.

Grr. Sorry. I'm not sure what I'm after if anything other than a rant.

My employer now has a gender policy whereby gender is officially categorised as "how you feel inside" (and the expression of that). I could weep for the instances of discrimination against women that happen on a daily basis.

Sorry, that isn't helpful. Are there any qualitative questions where you can vent your spleen? And is it really anonymous? Are you doing it from a communal computer where they can't track your isp?

Could you give your "gender identity" as "biologically female" and then write somewhere else in the form that the survey should be asking about sex discrimination not discrimination based on "gender identity"?

I used to work for a big accounting firm and complained to HR about a survey like this to register my frustration/annoyance/etc. but they didn't care, didn't see the problem. It had zero impact on how they run their surveys on discrimination but I felt the need to let them know they were actually discriminating against me with their wording.

I made clear my objections to the categorisation in the 'any other comments' boxes (spelling out that I felt it conceals the issues of discrimination arising from biological sex). But I do feel a bit exposed because while the survey is supposedly anonymous, I'm actually pretty identifiable from my answers: they know my department, that I'm female, that I'm academic staff, that I have young children, that I have a flexible working arrangement, that I've been pregnant while in the University's employ. Basically I'm one of two or three people.

I often leave my department out because I'm easily identifiable too...

I should have left it out really. Although in terms of the utility of the results of the survey, knowing my department is fairly important. Of course, this supposes anyone actually intends to do anything with the results of surveys like this...

Can you tell them you're not sure what your gender identity is and ask them to give you a list and an explanation.

Of course, this supposes anyone actually intends to do anything with the results of surveys like this...

You will likely get gender neutral toilets and some guff about being able to use gender neutral pronouns if you want to (and having to refer to people by these pronouns) as well as respect that the six foot bald guy with muscles and navy tatts (he teaches sociology) is actually called Samantha and can use the women's toilet.

Beyond this, I'm not actually sure what it is the gender diverse and trans people want in employment contexts. The discrimination that women face, ehether or not they are mothers, is starkly obviious and has been pointed out for some decades, but of course we're told it will have to wait until after the revolution or that we're imagining it and the mens are discriminated aganist too, poor dears.

Beyond this, I'm not actually sure what it is the gender diverse and trans people want in employment contexts. The discrimination that women face, ehether or not they are mothers, is starkly obviious and has been pointed out for some decades, but of course we're told it will have to wait until after the revolution or that we're imagining it and the mens are discriminated aganist too, poor dears.

Too true.

One of the things I find so infuriating about this is that at the moment I have my Head of Department onside on women's equality issues. He was genuinely mortified when I pointed out to him that he'd (indirectly) discriminated against me while on my recent maternity leave. He is open to making changes to structures/procedures to improve things. But (especially if we need to spend money) that's not going to continue if the data suggests there's no problem.

I'd be really, really surprised if women did not mention issues connected with maternity ...

Today 12:08 YetAnotherSpartacus

I'd be really, really surprised if women did not mention issues connected with maternity ...

They might well do. But it can pointed out that a woman identifying as a man may well have those issues, and therefore it's both a male and a female issue, and thus not discriminatory on the basis of sex. And if they are only going to look at discrimination on the basis of gender identity, you're fucked.

Datun - Oh OK .. now I get it. But surely those would be in a minority? I do see the implications for the future though.

OP, can you ask outright whether they intend to allow discrimination in the workplace to be on the basis of gender identity, or remain on the basis of sex. Because unless one takes precedence over the other, it can't be both. They are in direct conflict.

Get them to tell you, in writing, how that will impact on sex discrimination.

I really want people (not you OP, your company) to see how this will pan out.

I think most of them think they are being inclusive, and right on, without having the smallest understanding of the real life impact.

Any chance of following up? Because I would ask them to define terms (like Datun says), with sources.

Exactly Datun. It rather depends I suppose on the mindset of whoever is analysing the data. But my concern is that if you approach these things with a mindset of 'gender identity' then it isn't possible for pregnancy to be a cause of discrimination, because that's nothing to do with gender identity. I'm not suggesting that all discrimination against women is on the basis of childbearing btw, it's merely a useful example (and one I have personal experience of).

Ridiculous. I'd be tempted to write a letter to HR setting out the problems. You could probably cut and paste from mn, haha.

Maybe ask what prompted it? Great that they are looking for ways to support women and trans people but why specifically ask about gende identity as opposed to sex? Etc

It doesn't matter if they are minority. They would only have to be one. If fact there only has to be the idea of it.

It's all about the actual law and the wording. It's not about what people think constitutes sex discrimination.

There was a woman in Canada, I believe who needed time out to express milk at work. She was fired. She claimed unfair dismissal on the basis of sex discrimination. She lost her claim because the company maintained they would treat a man in exactly the same way (transman, don't forget man is the legal definition), and therefore it wasn't discriminatory. Ironically if the law was based on people who breastfeed and people who don't breastfeed, she would have won. But it's not, it's based on man and woman, legal definitions.

The terms man and woman no longer have a legal meaning based on biology.

Obviously, any fool can see that this is wrong. But when it comes to winning court cases, justice and being right and wrong has got nothing to do with it it's all about the actual law.

If you complain that you are being passed over for promotion on the basis of your sex. They can still claim is not on the basis of your sex because look at this transwoman who is now head of department. We don't discriminate against women here.

Sorry, cross post.

I think most of them think they are being inclusive, and right on, without having the smallest understanding of the real life impact.

I am certain this is the case for us. I think this is ignorance rather than anything more sinister. But it is problematic nevertheless.

In terms of challenge, I strongly suspect that if questioned the University will say 'Athena Swan tell us we have to do it like that' (Athena Swan is the University equality charter mark process). And indeed, Athena Swan do use gender identity rather than sex and they explicitly extend their remit to gender identity as well as sex based discrimination, without any recognition (outwardly at least) that these are in conflict.

I have to think carefully about how vocal I'm prepared to be. My department has a fair sized contingent of trans allies. It's a bit of a minefield.

Sex is still a protected characteristic in the U.K. Though, isn't it? Not gender- unless/until bloody Miller gets her way

Xpost. Didn't realise Athena swan had succumbed. Ffs

Athena Swan started in 2005 to get more women into STEM careers, identifying where the barriers to that were and trying to get those pulled down - as it progresses, they want to pull down barriers for everyone and for all subjects so Arts & Humanities as well. So in 2015 they expanded their brief to "gender equality" for all.

I work in a dept. that currently has the Silver award and we're working towards the gold, however, as this involves taking equality to the administrative staff rather than just the academics, I think we're in for a long wait.

Gender identity and sex are in direct conflict. They cannot peacefully coexist because of this.

One cancels out the other.

I totally understand that you are in a horrible situation. Could you gently, and with some well practised naivete, just innocently ask how this might pan out in terms of when there might be a conflict?

Or, ask what exactly gender identity is please and when they say it's how you feel ask what their legal definition of a woman is please?

Datun. That's a possibility. This survey was for the University charter mark and I've actually just agreed to head up our departmental bid (there's a university wide process and then departmental level ones). I don't want to run the risk of being removed from the departmental role, because I hope it will put me in a position to make some positive changes for women in the department. So it's a bit of a balancing act.