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'

Another way to consider the demands in language away from
established language is that those demanding use of pronouns is someone has stated using non-sex based pronouns, is that could also be said to be a political demand.

That a person who wants to use non-sex based pronouns is also making a political demand. Also the people who attempt to emotionally manipulate others to use those pronouns (even if it is not the person making the pronoun demand) are making political statements.

And what type of people demand or manipulate others to comply with a political demand that has not been democratically decided or decided by a democratically elected government? The more and more these conversations are had, the more that the nature of these demands for language compliance become clear. And there really does then need to be discussions around what political movements should be embraced in organisations.

@CautiousLurker
I'm so sorry to hear about your loss of five children. My aunt lost a baby at 8 weeks and that child was in her thoughts every subsequent day of her life.
💐and a big warm hug.

That poster is just finding any reason to deflect and to avoid reading the Dentons report.

In English, third-person pronouns are sex-based. That is the reason TAs are so determined to make us use wrong-sex pronouns for males, especially. Femaleness is inextricably bound up in the words "she" and "her", as much as it is in the word "mother". The aim is to inculcate in us the idea that male people can be female and ultimately to divorce words relating to sex, especially the female sex, from sex itself so that male people cannot be excluded from the class of females. This only hurts women.

Atomising the biological functions of women is a world away from using the word "chairperson" to denote a position which either a male or female person could fill.

The aim in the second case is to include women and increase our opportunities. It aims to free women from gender prison.
The aim in the first case is to deconstruct women into apparently randomly occurring functions which any person might have. It's to enable male people to be included in the class of "women" - just women who don't menstruate, or gestate. This is not happening to men.

Thank you so much. I lost 5 pregnancies at the 8-12 week mark over a three year period, between my two children. It has really taken years to come to terms with even though I was lucky enough to have two babies. I cannot imagine what those loses are like for people who never get to hold a child of their own. My two (the eldest esp) have come with their individual challenges, but I love and am so grateful for them.

I do not understand where "their" pronouns has come from. When I use third person pronouns to refer to someone they are my pronouns, the pronouns I use as a shorthand. The words I speak do not belong to you, and the words y0u speak do not belong to me.

Which once again makes the assumption that (a) ‘that poster’ (by whom I assume you mean me) hasn’t read the report and (b) if they did read the report the conclusions they would ultimately draw from it would be the same as the poster who raised it.

Would you care to outline the conclusions that you did draw from the Denton's report then?

When I divorced, I changed my name back from my previous married name to the name I’d grown up with. And I asked my family, friends and colleagues to respect that. Even the ones that ideologically didn’t agree with divorce. And they all managed that (even though some didn’t agree with divorce), because it’s a basic level of respect for another person and it would have caused me pain for them to insist on using that previous married name.

Whatever your views on sex and gender, I can’t see why you would deliberately want to be disrespecting another person by using a pronoun to refer to them that they have requested you not to use.

To me, that’s not really an issue of what your views are on sex and gender, it’s just being able to treat other people with a really basic level of respect.

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.

Well that is excellent to know. But believe what? That someone can read the Dentons report and conclude what?

You see, from your previous posts on this board, I thought your issue was that no one engaged with you in a way that you considered appropriate. Never asked for clarification and so on. So, I have.

No. You are not 'required' to do anything. And I agree, I certainly think that those reading along on these threads will be relating to the information that is being presented. After all, we all re-evaluate our opinions when we find new views and information, don't we?

Note for Readers:

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-dentons-document

This substack has links to the Denton's report for anyone who has not read the document and wishes to read it.

Sorry @Helleofabore . That was a rather glib post - a direct quote from a pp (see yesterday evening’s discussion).

The point though stands that no one has outline their detailed response to a report, article, etc, to be entitled to a different opinion. That stands on both sides of the debate.

Well, serves me right for attempting to interact with you directly. I shall seek to go back to avoiding doing so. No worries.

Re the Denton's report. I'm one of the countless women very grateful to Dentons for writing the report (including saying some of the quiet bits out loud about forced teaming, targeting the young and tactics to avoid democratic scrutiny). And also to James Kirkup - journalist at the Spectator - for writing such an informative article that highlighted these tactics and alerted so many to what had happened behind the political scenes.
For me, it went some way to explain why so many responsible adults beclown themselves by spouting TWAW, women can have a penis and all the other anti science, anti fact fantasies. It shows the power of lobbying and the extreme damage that can be done to children and young people when an ideology like this has been accepted as fact by politicians and others failing to use critical thinking and due diligence.

For all the damage that's still being done, the behind the scenes tactics are finally reducing in influence and the public is starting to hold the powerful to account for their failures to preserve women's rights and child safeguarding.

Thanks for this - I only became politically alert over this stuff in the last few years, so have been wondering what the references to Denton meant!

Whatever your views on sex and gender, I can’t see why you would deliberately want to be disrespecting another person by using a pronoun to refer to them that they have requested you not to use.

I wouldn't do this and have never said I would. I would simply like an explanation, in words that I understand, as to what words like "she", "her", and "woman" mean if they no longer refer to the fact that a person is female.

I am often insulted or ignored when I ask this. I am happy to use the terms he or she, but I don't know what the difference is supposed to be between a man or a woman if it isn't the sex of the body, and therefore I do not know what information I am inadvertently putting out about myself.

Is is anything to do with what would be considered to be masculine and feminine appearance? Skills, interests, behaviours, desires...?

Again, if it is simply an arbitrary label - like a name or nickname or star sign (although that conveys some information about birth date) - that's fine, but it is confusing that it is the word commonly used to indicate someone's sex, so obviously it implies that that is related.

Well Cautious,

You might like to see this one as well.

Messaging Guide : Transgender Youth and the Freedom to Be Ourselves

From December 2021

static1.squarespace.com/static/5fd0f29d0d626c5fb471be74/t/61b13d00236e2f7f2dbb9a36/1639005441624/Transgender+Youth+and+the+Freedom+to+Be+Ourselves.pdf

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/4439659-Ryan-Grim-results-of-latest-trans-activism-poll-A-tweaked-playbook-for-the-US?reply=113763453

The Transgender Law Center’s work.

And here is a 'dogwhistle' guide from the Greens.

https://lgbtiqa.greenparty.org.uk/2023/06/15/dogwhistle-guidance/

Feminist groups don't publish communication guides. But these types of activist groups do. These types of activists also are the same group of people who are involved in advising organisations about policies and training.

And what strikes me in all of them is the complete lack of self awareness of the hypocrisy in their positions, and the great deal of misinformation.

The forced teaming with other groups is also very clear. The Transgender Law Center actively advises to tie communication about transgender issues to racial and other oppression axis'.

This is a deliberate ploy and the manipulative nature is very very concerning.

It is no wonder we have some posters who think they can tell others that they are 'offensive', 'dinosaurs' and 'terfs' and so many other demonisations, because these communication guides bolster that feeling of 'righteousness' of those who don't seem to be able to see the chilling effect of it all. I mean, some posters might have evidence up their sleeves that will support their arguments, but I have not seen much recently that counters the links of evidence that we post.

Am a little confused by this post - agreeing with ‘divorce’ - or even with marriage as an institution - is not an ideological position. It’s enculturated across multiple societies, over continents and centuries, where patriarchal structures - often tied to the local religious institutions - are arranged around notions of family and women’s roles/obligations within those families.

Changing names, as a simple legal process, to recognise entering or exiting a marriage is an accepted occurrence and has dated back centuries - millennia even - regardless of your own religious position or your feelings about those of people changing their names. Possibly because people accepted the subjugation of women within most cultures and faith systems until recently.

The issue with ‘pronoun’ acceptance is that it is predicated on how we understand women, free speech, the rights and wellbeing of children and, additionally, the most vulnerable in our society. It is far, far more malignant (and that is allowing for the fact that even in its most benevolent forms, the patriarchal oppression of women is so far removed from ‘benign’ as to be laughable).

It is not a ‘matter of showing respect’ when an elderly and/or disabled person ‘misgenders’ a careworker and is denied care, is not an issue of respect when such a person requests same sex carers. It is not a matter of respect to be hauled in from of HR because you deadnamed/misgendered someone because your entire lived experience and cognitive development tells you they are not the sex they want to be acknowledged as. It is also not a sign of respect to impose labels like ‘birth parent’ on women who want to be acknowledged as mothers. At least, in these cases, the demand for respect is uni-directional and focused on only one party. The respect for, the compassion for, all other parties in that social interaction is completely lacking.

So, to me, it absolutely is about one’s views on sex differences, on whether you believe in gender, and it is also about the fact that ‘respect’ is a reciprocal social transaction, one that is earned not demanded.

and it is also about the fact that ‘respect’ is a reciprocal social transaction, one that is earned not demanded.

👏👏

Agree.

Changing names is irrelevant to pronoun usage and other accusations of 'misgendering.'

Anyone can change their name legally. It is a false comparison though because I don't believe anyone has declared that they would not use a name. Just that people choose to not use preferred language, including pronouns and referring to someone as female when they are male.

I have yet to see a credible argument as to why respect only is going one way. To the person who is demanding that their philosophical, or political, belief is supported by everyone who they interact with.

Where on earth does the post say its ok to deadname ?

im obviously missing something

Just WOW…. That’s your take? Where did I say that my position was to ‘justify’ misgendering or deadnaming? Or that I would ‘intentionally’ do so?

I have several transexual friends who I do not misgender or deadname (because I never knew them in their birth-names) but they make no demands and are, in fact, as ‘terfy’ as I am. They do not use women’s loos and are deeply supportive in my DD’s journey. They know they are not women.

As others have said - if people are going to intentionally twist words, there really is no point in trying to engage. I won’t be responding to your posts here or on other threads going forward.

Thank you. Given I actually agreed to change my DD’s name by deed poll to support her (it’s unisex, ironically like mine, my DH and DS’s names 🤣), I find this a bit of a reach.