Bank of England staff told to share pronouns and use ‘gender neutral’ language

[IwantToRetire]

... “while fostering a sense of inclusion among employees is, of course, a worthwhile objective”, he believed that training courses like the one given to Bank staff are “ideologically driven”.

“As a result, they may have the unintended effect of fostering an intolerant workplace culture in which some employees feel they cannot express certain, perfectly legitimate points of view,” the letter said.

“Our primary concern is that the ‘Trans Inclusion’ course appears to promote gender identity ideology while stigmatising gender critical beliefs, which are <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/P9CHb/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/28/left-has-captured-language-of-political-debate/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">protected under the Equality Act 2010.”
The FSU’s letter highlighted a part of the training that stated “using the wrong pronouns” is another example of a “microaggression”.

Full article in the Telegraph at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/31/bank-england-share-pronouns-woke-training-trans-rights-sex/

Can also be read in full at https://archive.is/P9CHb

I assumed this must be an old stories as I thought most institutions had given up on this nonsense. But appears to be recent'

Expecting someone to use preferred pronouns over well established and accurate language is a way of demanding someone actively complies to your philosophical belief.

It really is that simple.

I don’t care what people call me when I’m not there, so they can use whatever pronouns they want. I assume the majority use female ones because I am obviously an adult woman.

I’m also mindful of the Yogyakarta principles.

Expecting someone to use preferred pronouns over well established and accurate language is a way of demanding someone actively complies to your philosophical belief.

It really is that simple.

It is.

And how is demanding compliance to a philosophical belief ‘kind’?

How is making someone agree to distort their own material reality to suit yourself ‘kind’?

The builder, the architect, the surveyor, the bricklayer joiner on and on and on - which job discriminates between men and women?

And how is demanding compliance to a philosophical belief ‘kind’?

How is making someone agree to distort their own material reality to suit yourself ‘kind’?

Well quite.

I worked in construction and was the only person kicking off, to the bosses at least, when the high ups at the head office decided we were going to use, for example, personhole instead of manhole back in the late 80s and early 90s. It was just bloody ridiculous. I had no problem calling it a manhole even when I , a woman, was knee deep in shit down one.

The men didn't like the language changes either, but felt compelled to follow what the bosses decreed, in case I or other women got upset and complained, which honestly just caused resentment in some of the men as if the language changes were being forced on them because I was there, and that sure as fuck did me and other women no favours. Me calling It a manhole gave the men their words/language back and that goodwill earned by me and women who came after me was worth far more than trying to force those men to change via the language used.

It wasn't the language that needed changing or made me feel unwelcome, it was the sexist attitudes of the mainly older men who wanted to know, for example what my boyfriend thought about me working with men or the ones who thought I should be barefoot and pregnant and tied to the kitchen sink.

Once that generation started retiring things got easier, without changing the language of an entire industry.

And the very fact of having me, a woman, working as a joiner, or an engineer or a surveyor etc was what actually helped the shift in attitude. Men actually witnessing for themselves that women were perfectly capable of doing those "male" jobs, not changing the language to be more unisex.

You don't change long standing attitudes by forcing language changes on people. Some of the language has changed slowly over time, but thankfully personhole never caught on!

You can't get vast swathes of people to change their opinions or outlook by force or by pissing them off as it just builds resentment.

Yes, but will you go and read it?

Have you tried to read the report via those links? The links provided in the Spectator article to the report itself are strangely not working (one might conjecture because Dentons don’t want to be associated with the way it’s being presented by journos at the Spectator etc). But I was already aware of the report itself, it will no doubt shock you to hear.

I’ve not seen the phrase ‘educate yourself’ (with or without ‘you might want to….’ at the start) used by anyone other than posters who are openly gender critical on MN threads on this topic. I just find it odd (and both patronising and paternalistic) of posters to assume that because someone doesn’t agree with them they must necessarily need educating…

I’ve not seen the phrase ‘educate yourself’ (with or without ‘you might want to….’ at the start) used by anyone other than posters who are openly gender critical on MN threads on this topic. I just find it odd (and both patronising and paternalistic) of posters to assume that because someone doesn’t agree with them they must necessarily need educating…

its used a lot by posters that are not gender critical, usually its something like

’transwomen are women…educate yourself’

I’ve not seen the phrase ‘educate yourself’ (with or without ‘you might want to….’ at the start) used by anyone other than posters who are openly gender critical on MN threads on this topic.

I imagine it's a parody of how TRAs and #bekinders often post this. I've definitely seen it unironically here from those types of people, and it's also very common on other social media platforms.

Yeah, it's almost always a jokey thing, after being told it a lot by people who aren't joking.

Absolutely, Rufus. How many of us were told this and then went and did just that.

only to be completely convinced that there is no evidence to support Twaw at all. None that doesn’t rely on queer theory or postmodernism or some theory that is not based in material reality.

And how is it that people that assert they have evidence then never produce it. And it is not credible at all to use an excuse that the evidence will be ‘pulled apart’ to not produce it. That is what fucking evidence is supposed to withstand. If your fucking ebidence cannot withstand scrutiny or even logic , it is weak. And not fit for purpose

You'd think so, wouldn't you...

https://www.mi5.gov.uk/news/mi5-ranked-as-a-top-10-lgbt-inclusive-employer

The training is delivered by an external org and I suspect it was written 5 years ago and not updated. There was absolutely no recognition of GC being a protected belief or that all protected characteristics have equal status.

Hi undercover BoE contributor (sorry lost your name in copying and pasteing)!

As you posts suggests you are prepared to be a bit bold at work, have you thought of commenting to those who book the training, or however it works, that they should be aware that one set of beliefs should not take precedence over another. And that as the employer they need to ensue no bias is shown by them.

But by continuing to only provide training that prioritises trans beliefs over all others (pronouns being the silly representation of this) that they could be liable for making some employees (such as yourslef) feel discriminated against.

Other than generic statements like ‘I’ve seen it lots from #bekinders’, anyone got any actual examples of where they’ve seen ‘educate yourself’ used by posters that don’t espouse GC views?

On this thread alone, we have examples from GC posters. Go elsewhere on GC threads and it’s similarly in evidence on that side of the debate. But as I say I’ve just not seen it used in that way by those holding other views.

Ive deffo seen it but it never occurred to me to screenshot or memorise it

Often people who book training are the diversity team who have been throughly captured. In my experience the best diversity training is based on the needs of the organisation (data, both hard and soft) and is rooted in professional knowledge that delegates find relevant.

There's far too much training that's based on individual feelings and wishes, is emotive and manipulative, lacking in academic credibility and rigour. There are lots of examples but the dire Mermaids training in schools comes to mind:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3454658-recording-of-mermaids-training

There's a lot of awful training doled out in education and so many teachers sit patiently listening to manipulative nonsense (hence the problems with schools transitioning children in secret from parents). So I'm not surprised to see that the BoE also has apparently similar poor quality training focussing on compelled speech etc. It's a shame as there are legitimate issues about discrimination and ensuring healthy, respectful workplaces, but sadly too much training focuses on enforcing preferred language and ignoring the legitimate rights and needs of other workers.

Other than generic statements like ‘I’ve seen it lots from #bekinders’, anyone got any actual examples of where they’ve seen ‘educate yourself’ used by posters that don’t espouse GC views?

It's basically a meme at this point. Not just TRAs, all sorts of righteous people. I'm not required to produce "actual examples" and I'm not bothered if you personally don't believe me, I know others will relate because it's so commonplace.

I've already apologised for assuming that ElleWoods15 isn't up to date with some of the concepts relating to women's rights and the importance of accurate sex based language. I understand that the poster was unhappy with my suggestion that "You may wish to educate yourself .... about the Denton's Report" - a document that many women on here are very familiar with.

"Educate yourself is a phrase I've seen used towards women on here on a number of occasions, - mainly by random posters who dislike women's freedom to speak freely and decide it's their role to educate women as to why we're wrong to be concerned about the language of women being removed, the presence of men in women's sport, the abuse of children by telling them their bodies are wrong but a sex change will cure them, etc etc.

Hopefully that apology will stop the thread being derailed.

If it helps, my most potent memory of that phrase (and yes I'm relying on memory) is when the cyclist Rachel McKinnon / Veronica Ivy told Martina Navratilova she needed to educate herself to which Martina replied (and I paraphrase) 'Ok I will'. And so she did.

I remember that.

Often people who book training are the diversity team who have been throughly captured.

That was the point of my post. To make those higher up the BoE that in allowing staff to book training that only reflects a trans view point, they are putting themselves as the employer at risk of a discrimination case by and GC member of staff who feels their views aren't being equally valued by the employer.

ie in complaining to the employer about potential discrimination the employer will say to those responsible for training, you need to take the Forstater ruling into account. Which they aren't if only providing trans centric training.

I drew attention to contrasting statistics (relating to women in the workplace) and Forstater etc during the training (in the hopes attendees might pick it up) and flagged my broad concerns with somebody very senior within a week of the training. They set up the discussion with the person responsible.

There’s a lot of work happening to redress the balance for other protected characteristics and I think there is feedback from across the org about “the woke agenda” so hope there will be some traction soon.

I’m no shy Sally about this stuff.

I’m no shy Sally about this stuff.

If only all of us could be this confident.

But really inspiring given what a "prestigious" organisation it is!