Gender instead of sex in work diversity training

[FuriousFemale]

I did the online diversity and inclusion training at work recently. It lists characteristics that people may experience discrimination against. It doesn't specifically mention the equality act but the list is identical to the characteristics in the act accept gender is used instead of sex.

I want to raise this but I'm not sure how to do this safely. There should be absolutely nothing controversial about what I want to say but I've seen enough recently to know speaking up can be risky.

Has anyone challenged something like this before? How did you go about it and what was the reaction like?

I've been planning this at my work, but I just noticed that they are maybe getting wise as a new policy released this week uses "sex or gender" instead of omitting sex.

I always wonder if their expensive legal teams are keeping an eye on all this, in case they want to suddenly ditch Stonewall. 🤔

The stated intention is to introduce gender/gender identity as a protected characteristic and to bring something without legal definition into being.

The big push is to gain recognition for 'non-binary' (neither male or female / both male and female)

Some policies replace sex with gender/gender identity, others add it.

Its all for the same purpose and risks potentially the same result, removal of sex-based protections.

@popcornsong

I recently queried my local council (East of England) whose Equality Policy had listed gender instead of sex: Their reply was: I can see that the Policy does not list ‘sex’ but instead lists ‘gender’. As you will be aware, in addition to ‘sex’ which relates to just a man or a woman, ‘gender’ also includes non-binary and other sex definitions. I am aware that the Equality Act 2010 does not specifically mention people who identify under these other definitions but, in practice, the Council does give due consideration to the wider section of the community defined by gender. I answered this rubbish with: I am afraid this does not deal satisfactorily with my complaint. Sex and gender do not mean the same thing. Sex is the protected characteristic and you do not list it. I cannot see that you have any right to change the wording of an act of law. Is it the case that you refuse to alter your wording to conform with the Equality Act? How is non-binary a sex definition? Sex is binary. You can only be male or female. What other “sex definitions” do you have in mind? What other sexes are there? Can you explain how you "give consideration to the wider section of the community defined by gender"? How would you define people’s gender? Swiftly got a reply saying they would amend policy and show sex not gender. Definitely always worth pursuing this.

Phenomenal result.

I've seen this happen too, when the tsunami of complaints to the York Theatre about their 'gender neutral' toileting resulted in it being switched back. I will now persistently do likewise whenever I come across this aberration.

I can't speak up about it in my workplace: I'd lose my job or at best be deplatformed (I work in academia). I can go as far as refusing to state my pronouns, and that's about all. For me the only way of fighting this scourge is to do so in small steps, and on the same kind of basis you detail above. Seems they listen only when it's pointed out that they are breaking the law.

Thanks for the encouragement to keep on keeping on.

"the Council does give due consideration to the wider section of the community defined by gender"

I once got over that hurdle in this same situation (though it wasn't a Council) by writing an enthusiastic paragraph about how great to extend protections to groups on top of what the Equality Act prescribes, but that I still felt that it would be better to list the actual EA2010 protected characteristics (so, to list "sex" and remove "gender"), for clarity to show that body X really knew its equality-law stuff, and then add their additional groups at the end because that way they could big up how EXTRA inclusive they were being by really highlighting the extra groups and saying they were doing it off their own bat. And I suggested that instead of just saying "gender" which is a bit woolly they should say "gender non conformity". And I also suggested that if they were doing this extending thing they could add some of the other "not EA characteristics but things that often really impact people", like poverty/social class.

I was terrifically helpful.

I can't remember what they did about the extras but "sex" did get put in which I felt was a result.