Telegraph: Stonewall urges employers to give trans staff two email addresses so they can swap gender identities

[ResisterRex]

Quite a long article, some highlights below:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/12/stonewall-urges-employers-give-trans-staff-two-email-addresses/

"Stonewall is urging employers to let staff have two email addresses to swap gender identities on different days, The Telegraph can reveal.
The contentious LGBT charity has drawn up new guidance for hundreds of organisations vying for spots on its “workplace equality index” (WEI), one of the UK's largest benchmarking schemes.
This newspaper has obtained the form that employers must submit for Stonewall’s 2023 index, with each question marked by the charity in return for a ranking score on its “top 100 employers” league table or a bronze, silver or gold award.
But MPs have branded it “frankly absurd” and “extremely concerning””_, with an ex-minister calling on the Government to ensure taxpayer cash is not wasted."

How could this not be open to misuse and/or abuse?

"In guidance beneath the question, Stonewall says “you will receive more marks if at least one example is specific to gender fluid people, for example the ability to have multiple passcards with different forms of gender expression or linked email accounts/intranet accounts with different names and photos”."

Of course their new set of rules seeks to add to procurement:

"Other questions on the new 40-page form ask employers whether they "do not award the contract" or "require improvements as a condition of contract" to potential suppliers that "do not meet LGBTQ+ inclusion scrutinn_y".
If a contract is awarded to a supplier, Stonewall suggests they could "include a broad diversity and inclusion slot in contract monitoring meetings”."
Not content with procurement rules, there's further requirements for buildings and "allies":
"The document also asks whether bodies have a "formal commitment to introduce gender-neutral facilities in all buildings" and "support all cis employees (including lesbian gay and bi employees) to become trans allies through training, programmes and/or resources"."

Stonewall have completely lost the plot, haven’t they? I wish the press would stop calling it an LGBTQ lobby group, and just call it the TQ group - they don’t give a shit about us LGB folk anymore.

Emailing them using both email addresses at the same time, every time, that would work?

Dear wanker@bloke
Dear wanker@fuckoffyourenotawoman

😂😂😂

I’m in girl mode monday through thursday and boy mode Thursday through Saturday and on sundays I’m EnByyyyy.

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

PS Sending emails to the wrong email on the incorrect day is misgendering and therefore literal violence. 🌈🦄🏳️‍🌈👧🏻

Thanks, Clymene - sorry missing the original thread.

Do you have a separate performance review for each persona?

What happens if one of your modes gets promoted (or sacked) and the other doesn't?

Let's see how this would work.

On Monday an email is sent from [email protected]. On Tuesday M Twit is in girl mode, and uses [email protected]. So if the respondent replies to [email protected] they will have misgendered or deadnamed M Twit. Or something. But it will be OK on Wednesday, when MT reverted to boy mode. So MT will only check the appropriately gendered email on the appropriately gendered day.

This might result in MT not performing their job correctly and in a timely manner. Which could not be grounds for disciplinary or dismissal, because that would be transphobic.

What if you emailed them, using the correct email at the time, but later on, they swapped genders?

What if they are identifying as woman with x name - and their boss assigns them a task - but they later they now identify as a man with y name. Will they say to their boss that the deadline won't be met because the woman with x name is currently not at work?

What if they commit a massive mistake at work (or fraud or a crime) under one name/identity - can they avoid being fired/disciplined if they stop identifying under that name, and then create a new identity for themselves?
This is going to happen in legal cases with the way things are headed.

What if you have a split identity? At the same time - you identify as both a male and female?

Would you then get double pay?

Just no. I absolutely will not allow any member of staff to have more than one identity.
And I wouldn't deal with a company who gave me 2 different identities for the same contact.
Just ridiculous.

Whatever happened to trans people just wanting to live their lives in peace? This Stonewall stuff will just put people's backs up as it will be so glaringly obvious which staff members are demanding validation of their special identity(ies).

I think this is great. I want two.

So when I come across the total arsehole men in my line of work who assume my underlings are my manager (because they're male) or that my manager must be male (can I talk to him? No, she's too busy), I can reply with a male email and they'll STFU.

The piss poor work some of the men get away with is legendary. I want to be able to fuck about but not find out.

MORE EMAILS FOR WOMEN.

Stonewall hate trans people. They want to make it impossible for anyone to employ a trans person.

Too much admin.

This dictat is a safeguarding nightmare.

Two IDs, depending on whether an individual - in a significant position of authority - requires to be perceived as male in some situations, and female in other circumstances?

In guidance beneath the question, Stonewall says “you will receive more marks if at least one example is specific to gender fluid people, for example the ability to have multiple passcards with different forms of gender expression or linked email accounts/intranet accounts with different names and photos”.

Being given 2 passcards - isn't this a security issue? What is stopping them from giving 1 passcard to someone else, to allow them to access the building and rooms?

So I guess they'd require 2 separate log in accounts for online portals and databases? What a reporting and security nightmare!

Also - at a previous job, one task I had was to issue work identity cards - it was important that we had the person's full legal name on it, which matched their driver's license. This would not be possible for someone that changes identity on a regular basis, with no official documents changing.

If fraud is committed under the identity that is not their legal name - how can their employer then prove it was them? They can't!

Which leads me to my next question - at another previous workplace, we issued training documents and once these were signed off and completed, and the practical hours were met, we issued them formal certificates for their completed qualification.
How will this be handled if you identify as 2 or more people? Would they need to attend 2 of the same classes so the student attendance record showed they were both there? (you had to meet attendance requirements to pass), or if they only attended class as one person - and got the formal qualification - does this mean when they identify as the other person, those days they cannot perform their job because they are not "qualified"?

One former workplace required workers to do a lot of inductions - some were online, some were in person. Will both identities be required to do these inductions? What a logistical nightmare for those who are tasked with rostering workers onto client's worksites - so much extra work involved to ensure they had the proper paperwork, qualifications, and site inductions.

What about needing a medical clearance? Will both identities require separate medicals?

I don't think Stonewall has realised what issues this will cause.

is specific to gender fluid people, for example the ability to have multiple passcards with different forms of gender expression or linked email accounts/intranet accounts with different names and photos”."

Considering there are hundreds of genders can you imagine the security needed for Government posts or MI5? Half of them can't even keep a single laptop safe (left on trains, cafes, car seats, etc), nevermind all those passes.

@Pixiedust1234
Considering there are hundreds of genders can you imagine the security needed for Government posts or MI5? Half of them can't even keep a single laptop safe (left on trains, cafes, car seats, etc), nevermind all those passes.

Come to think of it - this is going to result in job creation as the time involved in administrating this is going to be immense.

The gender and diverse officer roles that have been created in the last few years seem to have gone to those who identify as NB, T or queer, so no doubt these new positions will go to the same group of people.

Is this stonewall's plan? To infiltrate the security of government organisations?

Definitely discrimination if they don't let you have two as well!

This is so stupid that I can't believe they wrote it down. They've clearly never worked anywhere where you deal with commercially or politically sensitive information. I'm cringing for them.

Another instance of Administratium: www.mit.edu/people/dmredish/wwwMLRF/links/Humor/Administratium.html

This is just another aspect of genderist extremism that will explode great holes through safeguarding in all sorts of situations.

It seems to have been accepted first where it was "only" child safeguarding put at risk and "only" women's safeguarding put at risk.

But dual IDs for a single individual - as ZombieMumEB says above. Safeguarding nightmare in all sorts of ways. Commercial sector, security forces etc

If I bring both pah how bi-phobic! ALL my identities to work, I will expect all of them to get paid, cos of course they’ll each have their own HR and pay record right, and I will need payslips for all of them naturally.

PS @Clymene sorry for missing your thread

Of course, the aristocrat sector of UK society got their own male rights sorted in all this GRC business:

Peerages etc

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/1.

The fact that a person’s gender has become the acquired gender under this Act—

(a)does not affect the descent of any peerage or dignity or title of honour, and

(b)does not affect the devolution of any property limited (expressly or not) by a will or other instrument to devolve (as nearly as the law permits) along with any peerage or dignity or title of honour unless an intention that it should do so is expressed in the will or other instrument.

Or in other words, the son still inherits, never mind he identifies as a woman. And the older sister still doesn't inherit, even though she has a GRC and new birth certificate saying "he" is now a man; "his" younger brother will still inherit, because they got that put into law that sex still overrules GRC when it comes to titles and inheritance.

Make sure you fill out time sheets for each of them. They're all part-timers, after all.

Why are employers still signing up for this?

I thought many prominent organisations had left this ‘scheme’?