Misgendering - LGBT allies training

[BlueAntelope]

We recently had LGBT allies training at work, jointly run by our LGBT staff network and HR, with an external trainer doing most of the talking.

The trainer, and other members of staff from the network and HR, said a couple of things I wasn't sure if they were quite right.

The first was that non-binary identities are probably covered under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. The trainer then talked about the jaguar land rover employment tribunal at length and didn't mention another tribunal that had found something different.

The second was that misgendering would likely be harassment if it was intentional, deliberate or persistent, but that accidental misgendering happens and people should apologise and move on quickly. Allies were advised to correct other members of staff if they got pronouns "wrong".

I have a new non binary colleague in my team who uses the pronouns they. This colleague started while I was out of the office for a couple of months and I have returned to everyone else in the habit of calling them they, but I am struggling to use the pronouns they would prefer. Just less practice, and also I'm sleep deprived with young children and some health issues so finding the "right" words in the moment is tough right now. I'm generally better at remembering in writing.

I don't have the time or energy to fight any type of fight right now, so trying to go with the flow whatever I privately think. But I'm worried I could get into trouble if I make the same mistake with pronouns a few times in a row.

I have a good relationship with my manager currently and new colleague seems very pleasant and we actually have quite a lot in common in terms of interests inside and outside of work.

Just interested to know my position should anything start to happen.

Non binary is even more bollocks than “trans”. If I had to worry about tripping over my speech at work I think I’d have to move jobs. Can you avoid mentioning this person by anything other than name?

Non-binary genders are not recognised in UK law. The UK only recognise male and female. You are able to change your legal gender, for some purposes, through the Gender Recognition Act, however there is no recognition of any other gender.

That’s what Unison says…

IANAL but I thought it was pretty clear that non-binary identities are not protected under the EA. Even if they were, there are not likely to be any practical implications for you, assuming you're not about to fire this person - avoid harassing anyone and all will be well. There is no legal precedent for the idea that avoiding using wrong-sex pronouns could ever be harassment (don't think there even is for deliberately using correct-sex ones, but that might be upsetting to your colleague and is best avoided I'd say). So that's what I'd do - attempt to avoid using any third person pronouns for this person, just use "you" when they(!)'re present and otherwise repeat their(!) name instead. It'll feel awkward to start with and you'll make mistakes, but it won't be any more awkward than learning to use "they". I wouldn't apologise for slips (whatever I slipped to), just move on. If asked, say you are sex-realist/gender-critical (and remind them that that's protected in law, if necessary) and that you're trying to avoid giving offence while remaining true to yourself.

(!) Before any smartarse comes to point this out, it's impersonal "they" based on not knowing the sex of the referrent.

Non binary is not covered by any law or gender reassignment category as confirmed by the supreme Court. You can be male or female under UK law and nothing else and can only change gender from male to female or vice versa.
If you don't want to use wrong sexed or grammatically incorrect language for this person dont just use their name.
If staff continuously pull you up on not using incorrect language they are bullying and harassing you because of your protected belief.
It might be a good idea to start looking for a new job that doesn't illegally require you to have your speach and thoughts compelled

I sit very close to them, so generally don't need to use pronouns, just their name. Honestly, new colleague is a perfectly nice person and we're actually quite similar in lots of ways.

I know not everyone agrees with me but I'm trying to use what they would prefer as I have no issue with them personally and they are potentially quite vulnerable in other ways.

I'm generally not wanting to rock the boat at work. I need my job and it would be hard for me to get another one that was as good, or as convenient for me. We are currently going through a review/restructure so I need to be very careful. The sector I work in is under some financial pressures although my organisation seems okay currently. Think hiring freezes, maybe voluntary redundancies at a push.

I just want to be sure of my position for if I happen to misgender them more than once. I am trying to watch what I say and generally just use their name but sometimes correct sex pronouns slip out. The training made it seem that if I were to do this on a way that could be perceived as either persistent or perceived as intentional then it would be harassment.

It doesn't help that new colleague is quite political, lots of chats about the news and politics and flags on new colleagues desk and stickers of flags on the work laptop etc. but I'm just keeping my head down and talking to them about work or other non controversial things.

Non-binary gender recognition: law and policy - House of Commons Library
'Current law
No legal recognition
Non-binary genders are not recognised in UK law. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA) enables a person to change the sex recorded on their birth certificate, either from male to female or vice versa. It makes no provision for the recognition of any other gender.

But it goes on to mention the Jaguar tribunal/possible inclusion in protected characteristic under EA2010...
so it's not 100% clear.

I think it's ironic that being gender critical means you are critical of gender stereotypes and therefore a lot of us could ID as 'non-binary'!

Maybe the best reaction to somebody saying they are NB is to say brightly
'Oh yes, me too - I'm gender critical so I completely agree with you that making people stick to gender stereotypes is bad! It's lovely to meet someone who agrees with me about that!'

Overall it sounds like this colleague is a prime example of what goes wrong when employees are encouraged to bring their 'whole self' to work - people should bring their professional self to work, and leave their non-work activities and interests to their spare time.

It's worth practising some bland responses to things that they say, along the lines of 'oh that's a big subject - let's just get this report finished!' or 'Yes I've heard people saying that - I have to go and see....' and don't get into discussions.

It's completely understandable that you have to keep your head down and keep your job. It's unlikely you'll find yourself in trouble for 'the wrong pronouns', but the environment has changed a lot over the past few years, and you'd be able to get a lot of support if there were problems.

It's a shame you can't just get on with doing your job well, which I'm sure is all you want to do.

It’s not 100% clear because of the different cases. In the Landrover case it was accepted because the person said they were going through a process ‘a journey’ from male to female. They used NB at the time but did eventually get a GRC. This is why the judge accepted it. In the recent ET the person wasn’t on a journey to change legal sex they just called themselves NB so we’re not covered under GR. This is why it’s confusing as in some cases they could be covered in others not. However the Landrover case was a first instance and as such another ET may say otherwise especially since the SC ruling.That’s my understanding.

This is the approach I take with anyone who has preferred pronouns that differ from their sex.

It took a bit of practice, and TBH I'm getting a bit fed up of how often I have to avoid using third person pronouns in various different situations, not just limited to work (considering the effort I'm putting in to remember to do it and that my efforts are apparently not respectful enough** 🤦‍♀️), but I'm sticking with it. I don't want to cause upset by using sex-based pronouns but equally, I'm not going to be forced to demonstrate allegiance to the belief that it's possible to have a gendered soul that differs from your sex.

** My children tell me that they understand why I won't use opposite-sex (or no-sex, non-binary) pronouns for children. They fully understand that I don't want to be a part of any child's social transition. However, they think I'm mean not doing it for adults. Apparently it's really disrespectful and, according to them, I should put the effort that I'm putting in to avoid all pronoun usage into making an effort to use the (adult) person's preferred pronouns. They don't seem to care that I find it offensive that I'm being asked to pretend I believe in something.

Apparently I should just suck it up.

Fuck that. Once I realised I didn't believe in the concept of gender identity at all, I found it liberating allowing myself to never be coerced into using language associated with it. "Misgendering" is a concept that requires a belief in gender identity. Without that belief, it's just a simple case of using normal sex-based pronouns. Yes, this will upset some people, hence me choosing not to use any pronouns.

OP, if you are choosing to use the preferred pronouns of your colleague of your own free will, and this sits best with your own conscience, go for it. But you can't be forced into it and the training that you've just received sounds like a complete load of nonsense. No employer can ever force anyone to actively demonstrate allegiance to a belief that they don't hold. As well as protecting "gender critical belief", the Forstater employment tribunal appeal judgment case also secured the legal protection to not believe that everyone has a gender identity - paras 107 and 108. Screenshot below.

Can words be harassment in a situation where the person they're about isn't around to hear them? I would tend to think generally not.

Thanks everyone. This has confirmed my thinking. I'm just going to use new colleagues name wherever possible and focus on my work.

As I think Naomi Cunningham said at one point, keeping your job is better than having a good case at an employment tribunal. Even then, I think the law seems quite uncertain in this area. I certainly don't want to be some sort of test case.

I may flag the training via an anonymous reporting system we have and ask for it to be looked at by the legal department, but I'm not going to say anything publicly at work.

In all likelihood my report will go to the people who organised the training but I can satisfy myself I have done my part by raising it at least.

I may flag the training via an anonymous reporting system we have and ask for it to be looked at by the legal department, but I'm not going to say anything publicly at work.

I reported similar issues with training (one was mandatory for all managers, another was voluntary for staff who are "allies") via the anonymous whistleblowing system. I focused on the law. I informed the company where it was misrepresenting the Equality Act and about the legal protection to not believe in gender identity.

I ended up having to step out of anonymity to a few senior managers and my HR rep (because the external whistleblowing agency messed up on who they sent my letter to and there was a risk that the LGBT network would be asked to manage my concerns instead of the legal team.... 🤦‍♀️), but overall it was a positive experience.

They changed some of the materials. However, they couldn't quite work out what to do about supporting people who don't believe in gender identity, especially the idea that it would be helpful to detach LGB from T (they agreed in principle....but apparently it was more important to support the "marginalised minority" by keeping it all together). That side of things just kind of fizzled out..... I tried following up a couple of times but got no response.

But. I kept my job and I felt pleased that I had stopped the company from misquoting the law on protected characteristics.

I no longer work for that company and I do sometimes wonder what they make of those conversations, if they ever think about them, particularly as it all took place before the Supreme Court judgment in April 2025. The head of EDI and HR rep both winced when I told them that I wouldn't want to find a transwoman in the ladies' loos at work... FFS. Effectively they were empathising with my lack of belief but would far rather I suck it up and pretend I'm not offended when I see the impact of this belief being enforced. Much like my children.

I now work in a company that has single-sex toilet facilities (with cubicles) that are shared with other companies in the building - it's a multi-occupancy building and my organisation isn't in charge of the toilet policy. However, if I see a transwoman in the ladies', I will report this to my own company and will ask them to inform the building landlord that it is illegal. So far, I've not been offered any training that concerns me, so all good on that front.

It doesn't help that new colleague is quite political, lots of chats about the news and politics and flags on new colleagues desk and stickers of flags on the work laptop etc.

How tiresome. Being overtly political is considered unprofessional in most workplaces.

I appreciate you just want to put your head down, do your job and not have to worry about office drama. It's not unreasonable for you to ask how non-binary status works in a medical emergency when pertinent information (like a female with they/them pronouns collapsed with vaginal haemhorraging) needs to be relayed to paramedics. I'm guessing they don't have a clear answer to this.

To be honest I'm sick of all this "allies" palaver. Not meaning you op, you're using what the training was called

The correct word is not 'ally' but 'collaborator'.

This is just scaremongering to make the heretics comply. I would continue using neutral pronouns and their name. If you get it right (but wrong to them) just apologise and move on. I wouldn’t make a big deal out of it. The sooner this coercive bullshit dies a natural death the better.

But by apologising are you not then admitting wrong doing?

I’d say more insubordinate given you are being forced to acquiesce to their demands?

ah the dread EXTERNAL TRAINER syndrome
Do you know who it was? From a charity or a self-identified specialist?
There's a very This Isn't Working Pod on this issue.
watch Akua Reindorf KC from about 45'50

I do know who it was. They were from a local charity that offers sexual health services, support services like counselling etc and community events for LGBTQ people. The charity clearly has a political stance but it wasn't massively pushed in the training.

The rest of the training was fine and I think enabled HR to tick a box but nothing I didn't know already so maybe not the best use of time.

It was around not making assumptions, not asking intrusive questions, thinking about the language you use and the trainer covered the debate around the word queer in a fairly even handed way.

Misgendering was something that was on their slides and so were protected characteristics, which were accurate and said sex and not gender. I asked a question about non-binary in relation to that slide. I don't think the trainer was expecting that question.

I do think things have moved on from the days of stonewall accreditation etc at my employer and it wasn't terrible overall. But yes, like Akua Reindorf said, there wasn't much thought given to diversity of thought or belief. The training was about one or two protected characteristics in isolation and didn't really get into balancing and navigating multiple protected characteristics or actual real life workplace issues.

It's not misgendering. It's correctly sexing.

It takes a great deal of mental effort and anxiety to remember to use preferred pronouns that differ from observable sex, as you are demonstrating.

If you use the correct sex pronouns and are admonished for it, do not apologise. Simply say I used the pronouns that align with x's observable sex in line with my protected belief in sex realism.

Simply say I used the pronouns that align with x's observable sex in line with my protected belief in sex realism.
**
….and 50+ years of lived experience/language training/habit/convention/knowledge of mother tongue etc etc.

Just to add to what others have said.

The protected characteristic is "gender reassingment" and as yet in the UK abound 10,000 people have completed this and got a GRC. Which means they have a "legal sex" via the GRC (which just adds to the confusion is the certificate uses the word gender, but in terms of the EA is or was about whether having a "legal sex" is the same as someone biological sex).

Under the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment, this can cover those who are starting the process of gaining a certificate.

It does not cover someone who just "identifies" or is no binary or whatever is the latest fashion amongh those who have grown up during Stonewall's reign of terror on sex.

Sadly I think despite the Supreme Court ruling and the recent High Court outcome, many people still think that what Stonewall said should be listened to, not the UK legal system.

But then neither does Bridget Phillipson!

So havind said all of that, I think OP you should just do as much as you can to point out errors in understanding by trainer and your employers.

And if you have an HR department can you talk to them in an informal way that you struggle with the whole pronoun rules, and they must be aware there was a court case where is was made clear that employers are obliged to respect the different beliefs of employees and it is not appropriate for them to say one set of beliefs take precedent over another.

ie using "they" or whatever can be asked for as a courtesy but not as an obligation.

I know everyone here loves a pile on about this stuff but seriously, is it really an issue? Just do your best, they/them can be tricky but really there's no reason for this level on introspection about this... If you get it wrong, just say sorry and move along. This person is your colleague just living their life and like you said yourself, a nice person that you like so just do your best as I'm sure they'll understand if you get their pronoun wrong occasionally. The Law here isn't really relevant is it, be polite and kind as this person has been to you. I cannot see the issue.

I didn't realise that a former colleague was non-binary and used correctly sexed pronouns when referring to this individual. An 'ally' pointedly said 'oh they've this and they that' effectively correcting me. Trouble is I've a disability which makes communication difficult for me and I'm slower on the uptake so I didn't realise she was correcting me and why she was off with me.

So basically I may as well have misgendered Sam Smith in conversation as the person no longer worked there.

And my colleague wasn't taking account of my disability.

It's not misgendering. It's correctly sexing.

Exactly. They are misgendering themselves. We are refusing to play along.