I just came out as GC at work, to the big boss and I feel a bit sick

[JustcameoutGC]

I have NCed for this. I have just outed myself as GC in work to the big boss (and some others cced in).

I was asked to sign off on something that I just couldn't and I said so, and explained why.

I literally feel sick. Like I have put a big fat GC target on my back. My org is totally woke. I wonder how many times my response has been forwarded already.

If you care about your work / see yourself as a professional, there comes a point when you have to speak out. Eg if you're a lawyer, it's your professional duty to advise that the law gives protection on the grounds of sex, not gender, and that, for example, women will suffer indirect discrimination if trans prisoners are allowed into opposite sex prisons. But I suspect that professional people are dodging that duty. Either that, or their professional advice is being ignored by senior management.

transbadger - I work with Deaf sign language users. You are dismissing a huge section of the population as many many BSL users do not know such medicalised words. English is their second language. When you study to become an interpreter you learn ways of coping with medical bookings in order to bridge the two languages.

I strongly agree with this. [Edited out a huge explanation reflecting my experience as a deaf person from childhood.]

OT - but just to say what an outstanding job BSL Health Access did in putting together an interpreter service so quickly to help the NHS cope - I can't believe it's not going to be funded further.

limpingchicken.com/2021/04/08/deaf-news-bsl-access-now-available-at-covid-19-vaccination-centres-through-interpreternow-app/

Yeah, the vulnerable are paying the price and it’s not you lot, or me. It’s not women.

Really?

There have been links within this thread evidencing that women (and children) are vulnerable. And those links are the tip of the iceberg.

It was ArabellaScott's quote, transbadger.

I'm GC , who knew :-) In solidarity OP

@Oblomov21

I'm struggling to understand what sort of thing/project/issue made OP come out to top boss?

If you “view all” on OPs posts, she does give a bit more detail around the third post at 12.55.

I also gave a guess/example near the beginning of the thread.

I professionally challenged my employer's conflation of 'sex' and 'gender reassignment' in their diversity document and received good feedback.

Deeds not words!

It is relatively easy (and low risk) to check employers, schools, health care providers' etc Diversity and Inclusion policies. These should refer to Equality Act 2010 nine protected characteristics.

"It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:

age
gender reassignment
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or on maternity leave
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation
www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights

If an organisation does not list both sex and gender reassignment or includes gender / gender identity they are misrepresenting the law.

Many organisations have inaccurate policies as a result of using, in good faith, sources they believed to be trustworthy.

If sex is not recognised then girls and women cannot easily make a claim of sex discrimination.

A simple, straightforward contact to the person/s responsible for the policy will usually result in correction and thanks.

Many

@SweetPetrichor

You don’t ‘come out’ as GC. If I worked with you, I’d be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action. I reported similar behaviour relatively recently and it was handled very well. I don’t think you have anything to be proud of here and I hope any decent work place will remind you of company policy and/or professional behaviour.

Are you completely mad?

@Wrongsideofhistorymyarse

I professionally challenged my employer's conflation of 'sex' and 'gender reassignment' in their diversity document and received good feedback.

Sweet Petrichor does that pass muster?

To be honest I don't even begrudge that conflation - if someone has gone far enough to have gender reassignment surgery, they really mean it and if they want to be called a woman at that point, fine.

But not "I like wearing dresses and make-up and that makes me a woman and so I can take part in womens sports and take up jobs and scholarships aimed at women". Erm no. That makes you a biological man who likes wearing dresses and make-up, and that's absolutely fine.

@BuffyTheSlavishIdeologySlayer

It's sometimes wrongly claimed that feminists stand against gender neutral language. This is, I think, a misunderstanding. I'm sure most feminists, for example, would support the use of 'children' as a collective noun in school when addressing the whole class, for example. Feminists would also have no problem with the word people being used in a context where sex was largely irrelevant, for example, attendees at a concert. However, what feminists on the whole are standing against is using gender neutral language when this obfuscates the meaning when sex is important. For example, when reporting crimes, dealing with safeguarding and in legal matters, sex based words like women and men have clear definitions and are needed for clarity and safety. If these words are dropped in favour of body part naming language, the meaning is too often lost, confused or escapes the vulnerable or those of whom English is a second language. By using the term menstruaters for example, you risk alienating those who don't have this bodily event due to age or medical conditions.

Excellent post.

Yeah, the vulnerable are paying the price and it’s not you lot, or me. It’s not women.

Pretending there are no differences between men and women, that sex is irrelevant, is precisely the reason that rapists have been housed in the female estate with women, who are paying the price, who are some of the most vulnerable in our society.

I'm proud to stand with those women, and nothing is going to make me ashamed of it.

Some very dangerous people, paedophiles, have been spared jail because apparently their 'female gender identity' makes them more vulnerable than the children they prey on. That's vulnerable children that will be paying the price.

Although just having read the point about the policy above, I see I am wrong. But I do think there is a distinction to be drawn between gender reassignment, and "I want to be called a woman today".

To be honest I don't even begrudge that conflation - if someone has gone far enough to have gender reassignment surgery, they really mean it and if they want to be called a woman at that point, fine.

A woman is a human being who is female sex and adult. There is no surgery which changes a person's sex.

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

Men dont have a cervix.

Neither do I. But just because it was whipped out as part of a hysterectomy, it doesn't make me a man.

Woman is just fine, thanks. Human adult female.

Petrichor, your language and opinion seem to belong to that of China 'educating' the Uighurs.

'further education and disciplinary action' - sends a shiver down my spine. This kind of totalitarian thinking must be opposed in every way.

@SweetPetrichor

Yeah, the vulnerable are paying the price and it’s not you lot, or me. It’s not women. I will proudly stand for gender neutral language, I will happily roll my eyes any woman I see wearing a daft slogan about what they think makes a woman. I am proud to stand against negativity towards transgender or non-binary colleagues, be that direct or through unprofessional word choices or opinions. They have no place in the workplace. I’m glad it is taken seriously and I’m glad the person was disciplined. I’d hope that was always the case. I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix, and that choice of language protects men who still have a cervix. We are not defined by our body parts. Is a women any less of a woman after a double mastectomy? Or after a hysterectomy? No, of course not.

In the same post you support language "cervix havers" and then in same post say we are not defined by our body parts

Thing is @poppycat10 it cant be about how much a person 'means it', if you not a woman then you're not a woman and that's all there is to it.

A person can be a transwoman and be called that and accepted as that, there should be no question of trying to force people to be further educated so they will accept as true what they know is lies.

In order to Safeguard children and women, people should not be prevented from recognising human beings who are male sex and adult as men.

It's the complete reliance on whim which gets me. One minute it's cervix havers, the next It's vagina/vulva havers, then it's menstruators/birthing bodies, in biology It's apparently people who have a uterus. How ridiculous can you get? As some pointed out on another thread, they never refer to the clitoris or the ovaries, two body parts that give women some potency oh no. So without naming a body part can someone tell me what a woman is???? It really isn't hard.

men who still have a cervix

2+2=5

I find the intolerance all very confusing. I have been, in real life, at dinner with people who literally believed transwomen were women. I would no more report for further education in a workplace context than I would report them for being in favour of Brexit, or believing that the sun goes around the earth.

Plurality of belief, innit?

Plurality of belief, Pothole?! BLASPHEMER!