Pulled up at work for ‘trans views’

[wherearethemarsbars]

Recently, a colleague at my company has declared that they are ‘agender’ and asexual and has asked to be addressed as ‘they’. As a result, my company decided to arrange a trans training session where some trans people came in to talk to us all about gender and terminology etc etc.

During this session, I was asked to describe my experience of living as a ‘cis woman’. I said that I didn’t have any experience of living as a cis woman, only as a woman so I couldn’t comment. I was pressed further and didn’t say much, only that the term ‘cis woman’ doesn’t align with my personal beliefs of what a woman is, so therefore declined to comment any further.

A few days later, I was pulled up on this by management who said that my behaviour was not acceptable and that I should be making an effort to be inclusive to everyone. I’m a bit baffled. Can I get others’ thoughts on this topic?

I think this contravenes the Equality Act - I’m sure someone with better legal knowledge will advise - but these things need calling out- the govt needs to issue urgent guidance

Sorry not read the thread but really were they forcing a gender on you?

everyone has a sex
not everyone has a gender

It will be a cold day in hell before I describe myself as someone who "isn't trans."

Cis is a term used in chemistry. It describes the arrangement of some atoms. It was co-opted in an attempt to create two subsets of women.
If people chose to use it for themselves, good for them. You can't force others to accept it or to use it.

Transwomen are trans because they are men - it’s the definition
no woman can be a transowmen

No it doesn’t - it means someone who accepts a gender and says that it aligns with their sex

many people reject gender and don’t want to be tagged as agender or whatever the latest is

many women if forced might say actually I don’t know how I am different to any man - but I don’t want to be labelled as a transman and I would rather not harm my physical body to help other people stop being such sexist bastards as to assume things about me because of my sex

Exactly. It's funny how women are screamed at for making trans people 'debate their existence'...yet they are erasing women and forcing women to debate their existence...

Transwomen are men for the purpose of the Equality Act as per the law -that is not transphobia, it is stating legal fact. Ie transwomen are men for all relevant purposes when deciding how they interact with women in single sex spaces/services/facilities

Transwomen are biologically men - this is the natural conclusion (both in common sense, scientifically and over venture obiter from the SC ruling)

Under what definition are you saying transwomen are women? Stereotypes? Because no other basis of classification is left now.

It’s a bloody joke!
I would have said the same. I don’t think I’d have even know what a cis woman is.. I am a woman!

OMG I hope I never find myself in a meeting like that. I wouldn't be able to hold it in. I think you did very well.

The only people not allowed to tell others how they identify appear to be biological women not submitting to the trans ideology. Funny, that.

I kick against this ludicrous assumption as hard as I possibly can.

My workplace gets 100% of my professional self. They are entitled to no more. As to my sexuality, personal beliefs, views on particular belief systems and the current state of my emotional wellbeing - an insight into which they constantly seem to be demanding - that shit’s private.

OP if you ever get the chance to put on training for your team about being a woman and how it impacts you, or if this escalates my advice would be to use the term ‘penis person’ instead of man/male etc. Talk about ‘penis privilege’ and how all penis people have the same potential for offending, and have physical strength power over women no matter how they choose to identify or what they choose to wear.

if anyone gets offended just say “penis person isn’t offensive, it’s just a descriptor, only a bigot would be offended by such a word, it simply means the opposite of woman ….’

My own personal view is that 'cis' is a dangerous term that I will not accept because it's an effort to make society accept that women are a sub-category of men rather than a sex class in their own right.
In terms of trying to be tactful with your employers, if you need/have/want to be, I suppose the answer has to be 'I have as much right to ask to be addressed correctly - that is, as a woman, not a ciswoman, as my colleague has to be addressed as' they'.
Of course, none of it makes any sense because in terms of feelings, if you're talking about your colleague as he/she/they, he/she/they won't be there and won't hear you so why the hell would it matter. Whereas calling you a ciswoman to your face is offensive because you are actually there to be offended.
Fundamentally though the point stands and I'm afraid if on person is making demands, it cannot possibly be wrong for another to make an equivalent demand.

Exactly. Women have been debating this issue at some length for a decade. The GI lobby opted not to join that conversation. Their response was #NoDebate, TERF blocker, ‘reframe your trauma’ and ‘enjoy your erasure’.

Now the SC judgement has gone against them suddenly they want a discussion?

Sorry, dudes. That ship has sailed. Not. Women’s. Problem.

Enjoying your erasure doesn’t feel so good when the boot’s on the other foot, does it?

As I understand the Supreme Court judgement, organisations like lesbian groups don't require to offer single sex meetings. But if they choose to do so, then single sex = female only

So, if your group allows TW to attend, then it's no longer single sex. It's mixed sex. And they're allowed to do that

Ultimately, I guess it comes down to economics. If the group loses members and wants to remain viable, then they'll need to exclude males

Flip reverse it and report to HR that they have made you feel anxious and stressed.

This is correct. They can offer single sex meetings (i.e. women only) or they can be open to all. If they have 25 or more members, catering for women and trans women may be unlawful. They may be able to justify it as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, but it may be a breach of the Equality Act.

Whether they "recognise" this ruling or not is irrelevant. It applies to them. You don't get to ignore the law just because you disagree with it.

I don't see what you did wrong. If you have to refer to your colleague in the way they'd like to be referred, it's just as important that you get the same courtesy. You are a woman. Not a "cis woman". Same as me. I don't want to be a subcategory of woman. I. Am. A. Woman.

And Man, just means an adult who is biologically male. That's all. So calling transwomen men is also correct and valid.

So if cis means not trans

what does trans mean ?

because I don’t know what I am

It's completely reasonable to refuse. They can't force the term cis woman on you. Their own definition of a ciswoman is a woman who identified with her sex, where "identified" is cashed out in terms of social and cultural identity.

Now I love being a woman. But I don't identify with every aspect of the way out society understands womanhood - I don't think any woman does. And thank goodness for that, or we wouldn't have the conceptual resources to understand and push back against sex based oppression.

If I were you, I would keep the conversation personal to me. I wouldn't even mention my views on trans and what woman means, I'd explain that womanhood in our society is sexualised and oppressed category. By identifying with the social concept of a woman, I'd be identifying myself as someone who deserves to be oppressed, sexually abused by men, take responsibility for domestic chores, have specific temperaments, and so on. Since I don't identify with these things, but do identify with being a biological woman (in the sex sense) then it's more appropriate for me to refer to myself as a woman than as a cis woman.

There was an interview on R4 last week re trans people being in their own rooms in hospital following the ruling. The interviewee was basically saying being in a side ward would make them feel excluded. And I thought, what about all those people with physical disabilities, or learning difficulties, who really cannot access services, or understand what’s happening to them. They are excluded. And is being in a separate room in an NHS hospital really a bad thing!

no it doesn't imply that.

What does it mean then?

what does being transgender or cis gender mean ?

what the fuck is gender ?

Sadly my employer (large charity) has doubled down on it too since the SC ruling. Madness.