Got a reply from CEO - Not sure if this is a win

[GenderIsAPrison]

So I wrote to the professional institute*. This is the reply:

^Dear GisP,

Thank you for your message and for sharing your concerns. I have now had the chance to consult with our D&I team and committee regarding your message. The Academy takes seriously all concerns raised about any aspect of its work. The issues raised are complex and I hope the points below help clarify our position on all issues raised.

1. The Academy is not a member of Stonewall and has not worked directly with it to date. Any interaction with Stonewall has been through partners who have relationships with them. We have not sought their advice in putting together any of our policies, projects, toolkits or programmes.
2. We absolutely understand the difference between sex (biological) and gender (social construct) and strive to avoid conflating the two. When mentioning the Equality Act 2010, we use ‘sex’ (not ‘gender’) as can be seen in our Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy available on our D&I Programme homepage
3. We cannot replace all references to gender on our webpages with sex as we need to ensure we reflect legal reference. For instance, we will continue to reference the Gender Pay Gap Regulations as this how they are referenced by government and will continue to reference ‘Transgender’ people as this is the way the group is referenced in the Equality Act 2010.
4. When it comes to referencing either ‘sex’ or ‘gender’ in aspects of our programme, where we have discretion to use the language we choose, we are mindful of the need to be in step with language used by stakeholders of our programme and wider society. This leads us to believe that the term ‘gender’ works better in some instances. For instance, in society and the workplace, ‘sex’ plays out through social stereotypes of gender and it is these stereotypes we are attempting to address through our focus on developing more inclusive cultures.
5. We will take absolute care in future when referencing our work on women/females to ensure we use the best terminology – whether that be ‘sex’ or ‘gender’.
6. We use the term inclusion to direct attention to the work that needs to be done to encourage cultures where equality and diversity thrive. We define inclusion as ‘The extent to which you feel valued for who you are (your personal and professional background, experience and skills) and the extent to which you feel you belong/‘fit’ in the engineering profession and your organisation’.
7. We do not use the term ‘equality’ across all our work but it is explicit within our policy and the Equality Act 2010 requires all employers protect their employees from discrimination and promote equality of opportunity. The need to pay attention to equality underpins our work to increase diversity and inclusion.
8. We appreciate some organisations use the term ‘sex’ in their diversity monitoring and some use ‘gender’/’gender identity’ – or a combination. • Acas diversity monitoring www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/t/l/Delivering-equality-and-diversity-advisory-booklet.pdf • Equally professional diversity monitoring www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/equally-professional-diversity-monitoring-professional-bodies
9. In the light of ongoing debate on terminology in relation to sex and gender, we will review the categories we use and consider how best to represent and encourage declaration of both through our diversity monitoring activities. I trust that this information will be of some help. Thank you again for your interest in the work of the Academy.

Best wishes,

CEO^

I'm not sure this is a win or not.
At least they are now aware of the issue and are reflecting more on how the terminologies are used. Hopefully the editing will come.
I feel a slight relief that the letter was not ignored and was actually taken into consideration. I think it helps my mental health to actually do something rather than despairing at what's happening.

• [Post edited at OP's request]

A letter which is understood and sensibly responded to by the CEO of an institute which is (a) solidly rooted in reality and (b) still struggling to address good old fashioned sexism - second wave feminist issues - may not achieve the same result elsewhere, unfortunately. But certainly no harm trying!

SignMeUp Let's PULL at the cornerstones rather than chipping away at the mortar...A sanitised version of my letter, if anyone finds it useful....I wanted to nip this at the bud rather than wait 'til it's materialised into actual 'toolkits' and 'training material'...

^Subject: Equality and DIversity development - ACADEMY

Dear CEO ,

I learnt about ACADEMY’s development of their ‘Diversity and Inclusion’ strategy and toolkit through a survey that was shared on our intranet within the large engineering company (XX k+ employees worldwide) that I work for.

It is fantastic to see such commitment to Equality and Diversity from the ACADEMY as an esteemed far reaching national institute passionate in promoting STEM. Precisely because of the position it holds in STEM, it is important to get this right. When I did a quick browse and search through the ACADEMY website, I was horrified to find the conflation of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ (see Diversity Monitoring Form), gender, gender everywhere and no mention of ‘sex’ , the concept and language of which is fundamental to eliminate sex discrimination and homophobia - key aims of diversity and the Equality Act 2010. A quick search of the ACADEMY website for ‘Stonewall’ showed their involvement so far, and I was not at all surprised.

I have serious concerns regarding Stonewall’s involvement in ACADEMY’s D&I policy. I speak as a member of two Protected Characteristic groups (sex and race), a female minority within a male dominated engineering industry, a parent and a an Ally to the LBG group (to use the language of ‘allies’). If you are not aware already, Stonewall has been over taken by the insidiously dangerous Trans Ideology which is misogynistic and homophobic, through the conflation of sex and gender, and incoherent language, concepts and vocabulary. I would say they are wolf in sheep’s clothing, they are meant to be a charity, but corporate Diversity training and consulting is obviously very lucrative. Stonewall is now basically a lobby group with a Trans agenda, in the guise of ‘Inclusion’ (which is a toxic narrative in itself) and ‘tolerance’. They are actually giving misguidance as advice – ‘sex’ not ‘gender’ is a Protected Characteristic under Equality Act 2010, by conflating the two they are erasing ‘women’, and discrimination based on biological sex, as a concept through language.

Stonewall’s mantra is Transwoman is Woman. And Transwoman can be any man who claims (i.e. self-id) he is a woman, and insists on being called a ‘she’ etc..

The grave concern is that the recording of male/female balance will be meaningless, to the detriment of women, if you record statistics by ‘gender’ rather than ‘sex’. Gender is nonsensical, it means nothing because it can mean anything. It is not properly defined and is not based on reality but all about ‘inner feelings’, social constructs, how you express yourself, how you perform to sex stereotypes and gender expectations.

This is a big topic and I understand that there would be much confusion and cognitive dissonance when ACADEMY starts looking into Stonewall and the toxic trans narrative. However, as a minority engineer who cares deeply about the Profession, I ask that ACADEMY apply their critical thinking, not be swept along by fashions, not be side tracked by thought terminating clichés, and do a proper Risk Assessment on using Stonewall for such an initiative.

Practical suggestions for starters:
• Separate sex and gender on the Candidate Diversity Monitoring Form. It should read ‘Sex : male/female’, ‘Gender’ just leave as free text.
• Replace ‘Gender’ with ‘Sex’ throughout website, or at least don’t miss ‘sex’ out and add it in. This is a key Protected Characteristics of Equality Act 2010. I understand that ACADEMY might think that gender is a euphemism for sex, but it is damaging to not use the correct language. We want to address the male/female imbalance in the industry.
• Use ‘Equality and Diversity’ instead of ‘Diversity and Inclusion’. ‘Inclusion’ is a toxic narrative – inclusion vs intrusion/colonisation/erasure, of woman’s boundaries/rights and spaces, are the flip sides of the same coin. Look at Dr Rachel Mackinnon in Canada – a transwoman who won a woman’s cycling race and claims that lesbians are transphobic for not wanting to have sex with transwoman (i.e. man). Look at Karen White in the UK women’s prison. I only wish I was joking, but I’m not.
• I strongly recommend that ACADEMY don’t use Stonewall, or at least have some gender critical feminists on board to provide counterbalance.

Here are some links. These people can put it better than I ever could.

This is a thread ABOUT ACADEMY on Mumsnet
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/

This is what’s happening in the police force
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3423318-Male-police-officers-can-intimately-search-women-New-guidance

This is the damage the brainwashing is doing to children in schools

Kathleen Stock – Clarity on the issue

Dr Jane Clare Jones
janeclarejones.com/2018/11/13/the-annals-of-the-terf-wars/

Lastly, I wish the Profession well. And I wish that the madness stops here, now, at the ACADEMY (it seems too late for the police already). I hope that my letter has made a difference to help making this madness stop.

Best regards

GisAP^

Genderisaprison THANK YOU!