Is it phobic / could I be disciplined for not recognising the TQ+?

[Ukelady]

My employer wants my team to join an LGBTQ+ event day. As a GC woman I feel uncomfortable that my employer takes this political stand, I personally don't think the TQ+ belongs with LGB and that the event is akin to a political rally.
Am I correct in thinking this? And can I raise it?

I think it is like asking you to march at Pride for your salary. It’s a huge overstep. I would explain that I think LGBTQ+ eventing is rightly for people who identify that way, and you don’t want to overstep that mark.

It's voluntary, surely? I work in a sector that previously collectively supported our local Pride quite a lot (when it could afford to - not as much in recent years). We were invited to join the march (and I used to), but certainly nobody was ever formally required to. Have times changed that much?

Do you normally work on a Sunday? If voluntary then you are busy doing something else.

Why make a big fuss? Just don't go, surely?

Whilst I agree with your logic in that it's a form of politics employees are being brow beated into supporting, assuming it's not mandatory your least risky form of protest is to not be involved.

Is it during your working hours and being billed as a Team Building Event, or charitable day? In these circumstances it's hard to refuse and I would be in two minds. I might be sick that day.

I would tell them i was brought up with the belief that religion and politics should be kept out of the workplace and would feel the same if they are asking me to take part in something supporting or opposing any political party or if was being asked to attend a talk by any religious group.

Event run by whom, based on which politics? Is it impartial, and to what end? Or is it a political rally for a specific view? In which case yes, there's a lot of concern around homophobia, removal of LGB rights and definitions, exclusion of LGB people from their own events and organisations unless they are politically partisan and willing to basically stop being homosexual.

I'd check. It's then a question of whether you feel safe and able to raise some questions like 'I'm aware of come controversy here and the concerns of many LGB people, and it would be easy to innocently go along with something without question which in fact may be supporting homophobia and actively alienating or offensive/distressing to LGB colleagues, and make them feel unable to be out at work, should we do some research into this? Like why Simon Fanshawe's abandoned Stonewall and his explanations of why? And what members of the public might be afraid to use us if we're declaring a political position that for example subordinates and rejects the inclusion and access of women with Autism, women of different faiths and cultures, women who have experienced CSA/DA/DV, lesbian women? Should we be worried about taking a controversial and exclusionary stance as a political position, particularly with court cases in the pipeline that may mean those women sue the living daylights out of us for breaking the law that certain lobbies have misrepresented in their glittery marketing? Or should we focus on being impartial and accessible to all with no affiliations?'

Or if you don't feel safe - and who could blame you, the fear and coercion and intimidation and punishments involved is one of the very nastiest bits of this lovely, happy, 'loving' and 'kind' political agenda and its supporters - then as pp says. I would be unfortunately ill that day. What a pity. Oh dear. Hope you all had a lovely time.

It may eventually dawn on employers that gay and female employees would rather lose a day's pay or actually have a stomach bug than have to face events supposedly lovely and inclusive and celebrating them. And that their customers are going to take note of political bias too.

I would enquire if this is being done for Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index points or to embellish somebody's CV to strengthen their role as an ally or SW Diversity Champion.

It might be reasonable to ask about the employer's history of supporting event days for other protected characteristics such as disabilities.

Just tell them that you regard gender ID as complete fucking bollocks and that hell will freeze over before I submit to performative virtue signalling cuntitude. Maybe tone it down a bit, but you get the drift.

You don’t have to support self ID but please acknowledge that these people do exist, always have and always will. It won’t make you any less GC.

Exactly.
I do not understand gender at all but I don't think I have the right to say anyone should be excluded or included. LGB groups deserve the same respect obviously.

Excellent advice from @Mandodari.

OP could be a lesbian for all you know, Billi77.

Lots of types of people exist; it doesn't mean we have to affirm their beliefs, their behaviour, agree with their beliefs, accept their beliefs etc. We are free to reject their beliefs and consider them harmful. They are not fairies - they don't die if people fail to believe in them.

I might, depending on what sort of organisation and what type of boss, say fairly casually: 'I'd prefer not to be involved. I don't believe in the whole gender ideology thing. Have you thought about this properly? Gender ideology is a belief system and I don't really think it's appropriate for an employer to be encouraging a particular belief system. In fact I'm pretty sure the Equality Act covers belief and the right of people not to believe. Have you considered how the Christian and Jewish and Muslim employees might feel about this?' And then I'd smile and walk away.

I'd probably ask for a list of all the discrimation prevention events, eg the Disability inclusion day, the Women's inclusion day, the Religious inclusion day; etc etc etc so that you can check your diary and see which ones you can support depending on diary commitments.

Do you ’recognize’ the I and A?

Ooh, yes. Of course if they do discriminate against you for refusing to go along to this event, you are covered by the belief section of the EA 2010.

I'm a lesbian and would not be attending said event.....nor wouldi be forced into doing so.

Oh dear god! Decades on and STILL we are being told to 'be nice'

@Billi77 you might want to stick around and read for yourself what is really discussed her. None of us have ever claimed that trans people do not exist. We all know someone who is trans, have kids who are gender questioning, maybe we even are trans.

We aren't speaking against trans people per se. But we do vehemently oppose Self ID and any male trying to inveigle himself into female spaces.

As I said, stick around, read our actual words rather than someone else's translation of them. It can't hurt you.

I recognise the existence of many various groups in society, from religious to politcal; I understand why some people support them but that doesn't mean I have to go on marches to celebrate their existence or to support their political aims.

I completely agree. But isn’t there also a shred of politics in excluding the T and Q from LGBTQ? How would a trans person interpret the exclusion of the T for example if were rebranded an LGB event?

@Billi77
I neither know nor care to be perfectly honest. The point I was making is that it is perfectly reasonable to tolerate the existence of others but to disagree with them on a range of things and choose not be involved in their events. I have friends who are from staunchly unionist backgrounds. I'm not. I accept their opinions are different to mine and that we are different in how we identify in relation to nationality and culture, and they are the same with me . That doesn't mean I will be out celebrating the 12th of July, nor am I insisting the Orange Order start a Nationalist group to make me feel included.

I agree again. But isn’t full exclusion signalling intolerance of others ?

If they were straight then I'd assume just like other straight people that the event was to celebrate lesbians, gays and bisexual people.

Trans people do not have to be the centre of everyone's attention day in, day out.