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?

https://sex-matters.org/posts/the-workplace/gender-critical-your-rights-at-work/

print this off and pass to your work

Why? Genuinely interested why you think so

As a GC feminist who works in HR, the Forstater case has been invaluable for ‘constructively challenging’ the ‘be kind and inclusive’ approach. The high court judgement has sent some people crazy; but I just calmly say it’s clarification of existing legislation and we must ensure we’re legally compliant. With a little smile.

Don't think it's OP that needs their training updatjng.

I would find it very interesting that it's ok for someone to self-identify as agender, asexual and ask for 'they' to be used, but it's not for you to self-identify as a woman.

The SC judgment doesn't make any difference to the law here.

As others have said, post Forstater your beliefs are definitely protected.

I think it's also worth noting that if your employer is paying for advice from lobbying groups rather than equality lawyers, they are likely to be breaking the law, but they may have no recourse as the lobbying group will claim that they weren't giving legal advice.

I don't know whether this falls into your area of responsibility in the company, or whether it's your duty to make them aware of this.

Could you not have omitted to be critical and just said 'My experience of living as a woman is...'? It wouldn't have offended anyone but you'd still have got your point across.

Making a point about 'cis' and then refusing to answer will have come across as obstructive.

Cis or cisgender (look them up) just means someone who isn't trans. That's all. What they asked was correct and valid.

But. I thought people had the right to self identify?
The OP doesn't identify as 'cis' and neither do thousands of other women.
Why should she have to accept an identification imposed on her?

Your work culture sounds insufferable.

The irony of being told off for how you as a woman want to identify, whilst simultaneously I’m sure you’d also be told off for not respecting how others (and lets face it, usually men), identify.

It’s a joke.

I might have asked if it’s still legal to force the label ‘cis’ on a woman, in light of the SC judgement.

You didnt do anything wrong I would have done same.

You were setting an excellent example to your junior colleagues, just not the one the senior management wanted, in their deluded gender fantasy land!

Agender is not a protected characteristic, sex is.
If the agender person has the right to name themselves and have respect from other members of staff, why don't you?

Only if you believe in genderwoo.

You've been quiet recently Chris. The SC ruling must have really stung you.

Oh, here's Chris again. Coercively assuming somebody else's gender. The massive hypocrite.

As the OP does not have a gender identity, the OP is technically agender when using the description kindly provided by Wiki (sorry).

"Agender is a gender identity that can mean different things to different people, such as being without gender, neutral, or rejecting the concept of gender. Learn about the history, community, flag, and variations of agender on this wiki page."

Forstater means that we don't have to go along with the nonsense if we feel it is to our detriment.

We should be free to express this without fear of getting disciplined for saying that we find cis an unacceptable word that offends us.

If they want to use it, then they can. But they can not force us to go along with it.

"Also that as a nurse in a senior position, I should be setting an example for junior colleagues"

As a nurse in a senior position, surely you are right to stick to the very foundation of your career - biology and science?!

I find the CIS word very offensive OP and would have reacted just as you did. Hold firm. Question them in writing as others have suggested.

'Cis or cisgender (look them up) just means someone who isn't trans’

It means this to some people but not all people believe this. Therefore it shouldn’t be imposed.

I would be compiling an email based on the points mentioned in this thread and asking them to address their concerns in writing.

Just so you have a paper trail OP.

Yes, I could have done that. But I didn’t, because that would just be brushing it all under the carpet. I don’t think I said anything derogatory towards trans people (or agender/asexual or anyone else) and nor would I discriminate against/treat any patients or colleagues differently if they were trans, so I think that’s the most important part

If management have said your behaviour was unacceptable then ask them to put it in writing. If you don't know what they think is wrong then you cannot change your behaviour and therefore will always be wrong and you will end up being formally disciplined.

Put it back on them.

If trans women are women and women are cis women where does the circle end? Does that mean trans women can identify as cis women and cis women can become trans women so that trans women can drop the trans label?

It's backwards frankly. We are women. We're not a subset of women. We produce large immobile gametes, we contain female organs, we have XX chromosomes, we develop physically differently and we have the capacity to carry and birth a baby or we have disorders specific to the female physiology that men cannot have that prevent us from doing so.

If some they/them wants to be respected and called they/them then they can have the same bloody respect for us and drop the cis label. It's unneeded and unnecessary and frankly an assumption of how someone identifies which goes against their own ideology of "be kind".

The mood I'm in about this right now, my advice is lawyer up and go on the attack!

However, a more moderate approach but one which still gives you protection should it be needed is to ask them to put down what they said in writing, with reference to English law.