EDI training at work - is this correct?

[Bananasaur]

The following statement appeared in some recent training: 'Men and women are protected from discrimination on the basis of their sex. This includes those who have, are, or will be undergoing gender reassignment.'

I'm confused. Is the implication that someone who has had gender reassignment is entitled to the protections of their 'new' sex? I.e. gender reassignment is sex reassignment? Is this the meaning in law?

Sex and gender reassignment are listed separately elsewhere with all the other protected characteristics. However, the training also goes into gender identity and pronouns at length, and gets more confusing. Terms are not defined and it states we are assigned a sex and gender at birth based on physical characteristics. It includes intersex people under the trans umbrella and uses sex, gender, gender identity etc interchangeably. It also talks about gender aligning with sex - how can two different things be aligned? Isn't that like trying to get my religion (atheist) to align with my shoe size (4)?

I've done a lot of reading around this previously and am really trying to understand it fully but this seems to have been written by someone with a shakier grasp than me.

I work in science.

I am in the process of sticking my head above the parapet for that if nothing else. Senior leadership, HR etc are all very much of the 'it's controversial... be kind' mindset. Any suggestions on an approach that is most likely to garner results would be gratefully received.

We have a huge gender pay gap.

It also says NEVER to assume someone's gender and ALWAYS ask them how THEY define their gender and what pronouns to use (caps verbatim), but never to ask about gender in an interview. And it's harmful to use binary pronouns to refer to someone non-binary and can amount to harassment but you are legally not allowed to share whether someone is trans without consent. This may just be poorly written.

Also states that someone who has transitioned may no longer identify as transgender. Does that mean they're cis..? Our internal guidance says people are one or the other.

And people can identify as intersex.

I don't know what to take from this.

You might want to peek in this thread while you're waiting for an informed response: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4381244-Any-other-scientists-feel-like-you-are-in-an-alternate-reality

A related piece you might find helpful:

sex-matters.org/where-sex-matters/the-workplace/

Sex Matters on pronouns: sex-matters.org/posts/updates/pronouns/

I love all these threads appearing on here as women start challenging all the nonsense that's being written in the name of "diversity". Hope you get information that helps Bananasaur

Thank you! I copied some info from the policy doc from Sex Matters on pronouns as this is next on my company's list... I previously anonymously raised the issue of unconscious bias and the wider implications of unthinkingly supporting gender ideology etc but had no response so I guess I have to out myself as a troublemaker now.

Latest is that it will be optional but 'strongly encouraged'. I had suggested balanced comms for those who weren't fully appraised of the reasoning for and against...

I just did the training quiz on whether it's always (verbatim) best to ask someone's gender identity, answered 'No' as they said not to in interviews, and failed.

Wow, bananasaur, where would you start?

I'd begin by asking: Who wrote this? Who edited it? Who approved it? Were all of them unpaid interns?

Seriously, I think questions are the way to go. Lots of them. Puzzled, innocent face as you struggle to grapple with this vital issue because you want to get it right.

Whoever wrote it, their grasp is shaky and clarity has eluded them.

How do you identify as intersex when that's a collection of genetic anomalies? It's like identifying as a haemophiliac, surely?

This thread will be useful OP:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4251618-the-comparator-for-protected-characteristic-of-gender-reassignment?pg=2

I like to roll this one at too where employers are concerned:

www.gov.uk/personal-data-my-employer-can-keep-about-me

No mention of gender or gender identity. Sex only.

This training causes absolute confusion doesn't it?

Is that the intention? Training that leaves everyone baffled is a waste of money and time.

EDI has become a gigantic farce.

I think bafflement and endless questions could help! Although slightly worried they may direct me to even more confused comms from Stonewall etc. Or try to explain it themselves. When HR tried to explain the difference between gender and sex last time someone had to step in because they'd confused sex with sexuality the whole way through.

I think the wording about wanting to get it right and being puzzled is good... and true. I actually started my journey to this point by wanting to convince myself. But the more I read the less convinced I became. Much like my experience with religion, actually.

I did try an email to my boss mainly composed of questions but she thought it was 'inflammatory'. Maybe the questions were too obviously rhetorical though. So hard to get the tone right! All feels very Emperor's New Clothes. Maybe I should add that to the EDI reading list we've been given.

The training was also wishy washy on race... nothing about structural oppression, just whether you felt happy when you thought about experiences related to your race.

I think that training course has actually de-skilled me.

Thank you for all the links! Much appreciated.

It does almost feel like the intent of the training was to confuse people enough that they would just give up.

@Bananasaur

Thank you for all the links! Much appreciated.

It does almost feel like the intent of the training was to confuse people enough that they would just give up.

It’s a well known strategy used by those in power.

Oh and we're going to have a Women in Leadership programme open to 'all genders'.

@Bananasaur

Oh and we're going to have a Women in Leadership programme open to 'all genders'.

We had that at work, I was asked to be a mentor but deleted the email as it said women included non-binary assigned female at birth and transwomen at any stage of transition. I would want to mentor someone who has and has always had the disadvantage of being female.

The following statement appeared in some recent training: 'Men and women are protected from discrimination on the basis of their sex. This includes those who have, are, or will be undergoing gender reassignment.'

It reads correctly to me. Men and women are protected from discrimination on the basis of their sex. This is the case (that they are protected on the basis of their sex) even if they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Ie this doesn’t mean that they have lost their sex based protection.

I am not saying that they aren’t confused! Or even that what it says is what they think they are saying, just that it reads as accurate to me.

@PaleBlueMoonlight

The following statement appeared in some recent training: 'Men and women are protected from discrimination on the basis of their sex. This includes those who have, are, or will be undergoing gender reassignment.'

It reads correctly to me. Men and women are protected from discrimination on the basis of their sex. This is the case (that they are protected on the basis of their sex) even if they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Ie this doesn’t mean that they have lost their sex based protection.

I am not saying that they aren’t confused! Or even that what it says is what they think they are saying, just that it reads as accurate to me.

Agreed. They have the right to be treated the same as others in the same sex class.

@Bananasaur

Oh and we're going to have a Women in Leadership programme open to 'all genders'.

Oh good grief.

Please tell me you are going to challenge that aswell?

I agree the superficial meaning isn't incorrect. I guess it's not clear which sex they think applies when considering alongside someone with gender reassignment? Are they saying a trans woman being excluded from a female-only programme on the basis of sex would be discrimination? Or that it would be discrimination to exclude a trans man from the same programme?

I'm challenging everything! Going down fighting... It's a real struggle to get the company to understand the difference between equity and equality.

We have an intersex awareness training session coming up - it’s at least the second specific one in two years (plus all the other LBGT+ ones). This speaker doesn’t have pronouns and mentions an interest in feminism when googled so I have a tiny hope she’s sensible.

Ooh that's promising! Though very specific training...

OP - given that the company have been comprehensively Stonewalled have you managed to suggest one or two key episodes of the Nolan podcast? They're very clear about the incoherence and dodgy tactics being used?

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p09yjp0d

I would maybe consider approaching that bit as, “of course this bit is right [explain why]”, then be quizzical about how other things they say don’t quite tie in with that.