I stuck my head above the parapet

[RedCrochetedWigFace]

So I work for a smallish company but we have a few different branches throughout the country. I think each branch has a least one trans woman. I've no idea if we've any transmen. They don't make as much of a drama and noise if we do.

There is a staff group who are generally well meaning but they've started kicking off about how awful the supreme court ruling is blah blah blah. They are mostly women. I tried respectfully pointing out that no-one has lost any rights and that it's actually protecting women's rights.

I said that I want any trans people to feel comfortable at work and if that's not the case then action absolutely needs to be taken but that the supreme court judgement shouldn't make a difference to that. Someone said what about the "ugly women who look like men" who were dragged out of women's toilets. I said that was an awful thing to call a woman and misogynist. I was accused of avoiding the question. They said that the ruling meant that women who don't look/present as women will also suffer and seemed to think that undermined the argument that no ones rights were being negatively impacted.

I just reiterated that anyone feeling unsafe at work needs support regardless of gender/perceived gender or any other factor. I asked what the group wanted to achieve. They said they want trans people to feel safe at work. I dont think I hid my exasperation.

I'm pretty sure I was respectful throughout. I tried to be.

Now I have a meeting with my manager and HR on Tuesday. I have spoken with ACAS. It's not a formal meeting so I'm not allowed to take anyone in with me.

FFS.

😂😂😂Thanks, I needed a laugh after listening to the dire CEO of Amnesty on Woman's Hour.

The Supreme Court judgment clarified what the Equality Act actually means by man, woman and sex and confirmed that this has always been the case since it was passed in 2010. It is not possible to challenge this judgment without going through every level of the judicial structure with a specific case. Good luck with that.

Oh that stressful! Really annoying you can’t take anyone

1. it sounds like you are concerned that your company does not breach the law, particularly given the recent clarification by the SC.
2. even if you were gender critical, this is a protected belief and WORIADS.
3. the process is the punishment indeed. The fact that it is happening in the workplace very much sounds like it is workplace harassment

I think as others have said, try and say little to begin with and just ask them to explain why you have been called to a meeting (without representation).

You could maybe say that as you are on your own and it would be difficult to take notes, you want to record it so there is no later misunderstandings about what was said. (Others may know reasons why you shouldn't say this.)

At this point, without knowing your manager(!), it maybe there has been a complaint about you, management has to respond, but dont want to make it some formal big thing.

After all there was a discussion about a recent event which made the news. It was a legal decision and some people may have thought it meant something that it didn't.

You were just expressing what you understood the decision to mean.

And then got upset by the comment about "ugly women".

Nothing you said was transphobic. You were just putting forward your understanding a court ruling.

And wait and see if they want to blow it up into a trans versus women incident.

All you did was try and explain what the court ruling means.

Good luck, and sorry you are being put through this.

for being brave"

Dont ask about recording the meeting, just do it.If you ask and they say no you;ll have more problems if you want to use a recording later. It's not illegal to record for your own use - and you just wanted to be sure of your recollection.

Well done and good luck.

Thanks.

I supose I was thinking if they knew it was going to be recorded they couldnt just fudge around, or try and say something like, maybe you could just say sorry.

"You people"?
What women who know what women are, the ones who understand basic biology?
Yes, I'm happily in that group thanks.
Are you an incel, handmaiden or other type of women-hater?

Well done - make sure you’re illustrating the wider implications of the law such as guaranteed single sex care for disabled women and girls, and elderly women, and equal pay protections, maternity care etc for transmen. also that the judgment underlined trans ppl are protected from harassment and discrimination. Basic arrangements for third spaces (or fourth, as disabled loos) is all the ruling points towards

yes, I’d record and be seen to take notes. Eg - I’m just going to write that down, this is what you’re saying isn’t it

Good for you, RedCrochetedWigFace and good luck to you; I can't think of anything which other posters haven't already said. Just take no notice of the couple of delusional ones, who are trying to convince you that things are 180° to what they are in reality.

Thank you everyone for your support.

I've taken notes and will read up on the cases you've highlighted. I'll definitely mention the maternity stuff as that is directly linked to HR policy and has the potential to kick them in the butt.

I like the suggestion of limiting talking. I tend to fill silences so will be mindful of not doing that.

Someone said about work having a disproportionate amount of transwomen. It certainly seems that way. On the one hand it's great that people feel able to say they are trans. You want to be called Sue and wear a dress? Knock yourself out. However, that's not at the expense of other people.

It's just so frustrating that the work group are shouting about how unfair it is that transwomen are being discriminated against without recognising the impact of the ruling for women. Or, indeed that no discrimination should be happening as a result of it anyway.

The really funny thing is, we have loads of unisex disabled toilets. Our showers are also unisex (each shower is in its own room with a wet and dry area with a proper lockable door etc). So what exactly they want work to do, I don't know. I posted before (I think) about a transwoman complaining that a pcos etc group didn't welcome them with open arms and the group had to close. Obviously that's not the formal reason but everyone knows its the real reason.

I was thinking yesterday. We have a company who do health checks. The same staff group insisted that people could specify whether they wanted a man or woman to do their health check. I'm so annoyed that I didn't raise that as a point yesterday. Then again, they had blinkers on so probably would said that they'd be fine with a transwoman doing the check.

I was the only person in a group of 14 who was speaking out. There were 4 very vocal people (one of whom I think is a transwomen but I don't know for certain) and everyone else for the most part stayed silent. I don't know all of them or what "side" they fell on. There were a few nods so some did agree with some of my points. The more I think about it, the more pissed off I get that no one stepped up to help me. Even just to call out the "ugly women" comment.

OP, I admire your backbone.

The closure of the PCOS group sounds like a very clear case of sex discrimination: the desires of one man were prioritised over the needs of a group of women. Sounds like a maddening place to work!

As other have said, in your position I'd secretly record the meeting. It's legal to do so if it's for personal use, and I'd want that evidence in case I ended up in a tribunal. Hopefully your employers will see sense, but if not perhaps you're going to be the next Maya....

Best of luck!

@IwantToRetire The attempts to fudge around can be very useful at employment tribunals, indicates they've made a decision before hearing you = unfair process.

"I was the only person speaking out...."

And that's why they've gone for you. But don't feel 'obliged" to take a stand if you fear for your job. Which is why being aware that the power imbalance may "pressurise" you into saying more than you want to initially. So feel free to answer defensively. "I don't recall", I'll need to think about that. Let me look at the notes I've made".
It can help to rehearse any key points - to say them out loud (even in an empty room). When we're under pressure we often rely on our "learned behaviour" so if you've rehearsed something like "I joined in a discussion that was started by *. I simply responded in a respectful way with some factual information about the Supreme Court judgment".

Depending on the individuals it may be a balanced and neutral discussion simply ascertaining facts. Or it may be designed to out you as a terrible transphobe - you'll know which is most likely. Which is why sticking to your key points and not getting drawn in is useful.

Good luck.

Have sent you a PM.

Just to echo comments about recording without asking. It's the best way to protect yourself. Write notes and if they are challenged or disputed, the recording is your protection. You don't disclose it unless it becomes necessary.

I was thinking yesterday. We have a company who do health checks. The same staff group insisted that people could specify whether they wanted a man or woman to do their health check.

There is explicit provision for this in the Equality Act. I can’t remember the exact section offhand but it is easy to find.

Also, well done on speaking up. I did the same, though pre-Forstater. 😕

As others have said, be clear that you’ll be taking notes. As they’ve told you that you can’t be accompanied I would ask them to wait if you need to write something in your notes before they move onto the next point or question.

If there are posters here with relevant HR or legal experience, would it be a good idea for OP to send an emailed summary afterwards with any concerns she has or agreed actions to check her recollection so there’s a record and paper trail?

@RedCrochetedWigFace have you noticed Stressed’s first point?

it’s a useful one to reiterate regularly during your meeting.

"Someone said what about the "ugly women who look like men" who were dragged out of women's toilets."

The person saying that could, in turn, be accused of transphobia ;) :

1. Presumably they were using this as an argument about gender non-conforming women-women being affected - therefore implying that transwomen are not, in fact, women!

2. Due to being male, a lot of transwomen look like men. This person is therefore saying that the vast majority of transwomen are ugly.

Yes it happens regularly and has done for years, eg https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/woman-upset-embarrassed-after-ms-27004102

I have friends who are regularly 'sirred' because they are butch, but still cis females.

There is no such thing as “cis”. Women are female. Male people are not “another type of woman”. Women only come in one sex.

Well done for speaking out. You’ve had some great advice on here (yayy Mumsnet) and very good luck in your meeting. I’m keeping my fingers crossed your manager is a sensible Terf.

Again, still not sure why butch lesbian gets misgendered means women can’t have single sex rape shelters. That really isn’t a gotcha.

Butch lesbians and men with long hair have been being “misgendered” since forever, and until the narrative that “misgendering is literal violence” was invented, they would generally laugh and correct the person, and life would go quietly on.

Source: I’m the wife and mother of long-haired men. We regularly get asked “Table for three, ladies?” by harried waitstaff. No one has ever died - or even cared.

I used to have very short hair, and a gender-neutral work uniform. Sometimes people called me "Sir" and I wasn't remotely offended. I didn't correct them when it happened, because I liked to provide a bit of light amusement for my colleagues, and we'd have a good laugh about it later on.
Funnily enough, people who thought I was male were always very respectful towards me.