The thing is, TVC, is that what is superb about it is that it is trolling, but every single one of the questions is valid and the Government does not have an answer to them, but is going to crack on anyway because of capture by the "most marginalised minority in society".
Very good.
I’m embarrassed to say that I sat through a presentation from some external trans ideology zealots at work recently and said not a word….. and nor did anyone else. It is scary how this bullshit has has become largely unchallengeable in many large sophisticated business environments. Hey ho - holding on to the hope that it will all implode under the weight of its own logical inconsistencies (mild version) before very much longer.
It will implode quicker if normal people start pointing out that it is all bullshit.
I went on a work trip to [very woke country] a couple of weeks ago and our CFO over there asked me if we were all putting pronouns in our email signatures.
I said over my dead body will I be putting pronouns in my email signature, and told him why.
It is scary how this bullshit has has become largely unchallengeable in many large sophisticated business environments.
On the other hand, this morning I singlehandedly dismantled a policy which my employer's HR function was proposing to introduce which had been cut-and-pasted from a Stonewall template and simultaneously peaked 4 senior leaders when they learned there was a difference between sex and gender, what being gender-critical meant and that women have been fired for saying sex is real.
Tom F I wonder if you could talk about how you walked back your stance from having made the mantras-supporting video, added pronouns to your emails, etc, just in case it gives someone else tools to do so themself.
Some people are so entrenched, with their ego driving their behaviour. They won't easily acknowledge they have now come to their senses, whilst their pride at being perceived to have the right opinions is driving their behaviour, even if they have come to realise the harm and abuse is happening as a result of the position they have vocally supported.
You went as far as to even make a video for the company supporting the mantras. How did you come to get so caught up in the mantras? How did you begin to untangle the mess you'd made, and did anyone confront you about your change of mind? Was there any fallout? Are there still problems with speaking out openly about the problems with the mantras? Are there still colleagues you fear speaking out openly to? What has happened to those policies within the company, supporting the mantras - do they still exist?
You went as far as to even make a video for the company supporting the mantras. How did you come to get so caught up in the mantras?
A gay colleague told me he was gay. He said he didn't want to tell other people (particularly American colleagues) as he thought this would harm his career. I thought this was awful. I asked what I could do to help, as a straight bloke, make sure that gay colleagues knew for most people this wouldn't be an issue, and that he wouldn't feel like he couldn't talk about what he'd done that weekend without feeling uncomforable. He said use pronouns in your email footer. When I did one of the honchos from the employee resource group got in touch and asked if I would do a video explaining why. I agreed.
How did you begin to untangle the mess you'd made, and did anyone confront you about your change of mind?
Not sure there was a massive tangle or mess. I was working on gender pay reporting and realised the name of the legislation was ridiculous. Then I had to explain the difference between gender and sex to clients, and so began looking into it more. Then I came across the Forstater case and became much more aware of what TRAs were doing, and the direct impact on my specialism in law that the conflation of sex and gender was having, and the tactics which were being used. Nobody confronted me about removing my pronouns at all. Nobody has ever mentioned it.
Was there any fallout?
No.
Are there still problems with speaking out openly about the problems with the mantras? Are there still colleagues you fear speaking out openly to?
No. I became more open after the Forstater EAT judgment. I'm in contact with her, and a number of gender-critical lawyers. I have told my own team and colleagues that I am a gender-critical person, mainly because I wanted them to tell me if they thought I was letting my own views cloud my objectivity doing my job. I don't fear speaking out openly now, but I am in the priviliged position of being the head of employment law for a very large listed company. I think they would have to think very long and hard about sacking me, particularly for expressing a protected belief. I'm obviously very careful that I express my beliefs in a measured and respectful way, even if expressing them in a measured and respectful way would be seen as some people as hateful per se.
What has happened to those policies within the company, supporting the mantras - do they still exist?
Inclusive policies are good, and they exist. The clients now understand that the Equality Act 2010 contains 9 protected characteristics, and often the rights of those 9 groups can conflict and should be balanced. Gender-neutral toilets were suggested (at the expense of women, obvs) and I explained the law. Another policy was proposed which would make certain actions (which are protected) dismissing offences and I explained the law.
The main bit is getting people to understand that inclusion of some groups can mean exclusion of others. As I was talking today I received an invite from the employee resource group to a bingo session on site with a drag queen from off the telly. I explained that while that was inclusive for some people, it may well be very exclusive and offensive for some women and the equivalent of blackface. They have just never even considered that, because the Stonewall position is so well entrenched.
I don't think you can even have a trans inclusive women's changing room in a way that is inclusive for a female Muslim employee, Billy, let alone a burlesque evening.
sorry was using the modern american parlance of liberalism rather than ACTUAL liberalism as a philosophy - i am an adhereant of the latter but not the former.
I think US ideology needs to be contained as its highly polarising and neither the right nor the left over there have attractive positions.
Yeah, but of course this shit originated in the US.
It is a country which values individual liberty over collective responsibility, where standards of education are deplorable, where politics is deeply polarised between the conservative right and the "liberal" "left", and where most people have traditionally held strong religious beliefs.
Unsurprisingly, the result is an ideology entirely centred around the individual, riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies, based around the idea that everybody has a magical gendered soul.
Whilst the conservatives still cling to their traditional religions, the liberals have largely abandoned them as being inconsistent with their beliefs around matters such as abortion rights. But Americans just aren't cut out for atheism. They need to believe that their lives have some deeper meaning and that we are more special than other animals, and so magical gendered souls is what has come along to fill the void left behind by the abandonment of organised religion by most liberals.
Because conservatives still believe in God, and not magical gendered souls, this further cements gender ideology as being an essential component of American liberalism. Questioning it will see you likened to the religious conservatives, which would be unthinkable.
And because standards of education are so poor, even educated Americans lack the critical thinking skills to see this ideology for what it is. In fact, the more educated they are, the less likely they are to question it, simply accepting that it must be real because it is what their tribe believes, and that people who don't see the point of gender are simply too thick to understand things the way they do. (They will never admit that they don't understand it either; nobody wants to be the first to point out that the Emperor is butt naked.)
0
0
Peanuts?
Snoopy?
0
0
Great stuff.
0
0
Top trolling. Chill would be proud.
4
0
The thing is, TVC, is that what is superb about it is that it is trolling, but every single one of the questions is valid and the Government does not have an answer to them, but is going to crack on anyway because of capture by the "most marginalised minority in society".
0
0
Check out Blair White. She's trans and very sensible on the topic. Here she is talking about males in female sports.
https://youtu.be/e9SSh4D-nkQ
1
0
What a massive bigot Blair is!
0
0
Quite fit though.
0
0
Agreed. Superb piece of writing, and no joke.
2
0
Very good.
I’m embarrassed to say that I sat through a presentation from some external trans ideology zealots at work recently and said not a word….. and nor did anyone else. It is scary how this bullshit has has become largely unchallengeable in many large sophisticated business environments. Hey ho - holding on to the hope that it will all implode under the weight of its own logical inconsistencies (mild version) before very much longer.
4
0
It will implode quicker if normal people start pointing out that it is all bullshit.
I went on a work trip to [very woke country] a couple of weeks ago and our CFO over there asked me if we were all putting pronouns in our email signatures.
I said over my dead body will I be putting pronouns in my email signature, and told him why.
0
0
That's good work.
2
0
On the other hand, this morning I singlehandedly dismantled a policy which my employer's HR function was proposing to introduce which had been cut-and-pasted from a Stonewall template and simultaneously peaked 4 senior leaders when they learned there was a difference between sex and gender, what being gender-critical meant and that women have been fired for saying sex is real.
Productive morning.
1
0
Tom F I wonder if you could talk about how you walked back your stance from having made the mantras-supporting video, added pronouns to your emails, etc, just in case it gives someone else tools to do so themself.
Some people are so entrenched, with their ego driving their behaviour. They won't easily acknowledge they have now come to their senses, whilst their pride at being perceived to have the right opinions is driving their behaviour, even if they have come to realise the harm and abuse is happening as a result of the position they have vocally supported.
You went as far as to even make a video for the company supporting the mantras. How did you come to get so caught up in the mantras? How did you begin to untangle the mess you'd made, and did anyone confront you about your change of mind? Was there any fallout? Are there still problems with speaking out openly about the problems with the mantras? Are there still colleagues you fear speaking out openly to? What has happened to those policies within the company, supporting the mantras - do they still exist?
1
0
When I saw he/him in someone’s signature recently I assumed it was sarcasm or irony.
Is this for real.
Prodigal SON (he/him/father/uncle/hetero)
2
0
You went as far as to even make a video for the company supporting the mantras. How did you come to get so caught up in the mantras?
A gay colleague told me he was gay. He said he didn't want to tell other people (particularly American colleagues) as he thought this would harm his career. I thought this was awful. I asked what I could do to help, as a straight bloke, make sure that gay colleagues knew for most people this wouldn't be an issue, and that he wouldn't feel like he couldn't talk about what he'd done that weekend without feeling uncomforable. He said use pronouns in your email footer. When I did one of the honchos from the employee resource group got in touch and asked if I would do a video explaining why. I agreed.
How did you begin to untangle the mess you'd made, and did anyone confront you about your change of mind?
Not sure there was a massive tangle or mess. I was working on gender pay reporting and realised the name of the legislation was ridiculous. Then I had to explain the difference between gender and sex to clients, and so began looking into it more. Then I came across the Forstater case and became much more aware of what TRAs were doing, and the direct impact on my specialism in law that the conflation of sex and gender was having, and the tactics which were being used. Nobody confronted me about removing my pronouns at all. Nobody has ever mentioned it.
Was there any fallout?
No.
Are there still problems with speaking out openly about the problems with the mantras? Are there still colleagues you fear speaking out openly to?
No. I became more open after the Forstater EAT judgment. I'm in contact with her, and a number of gender-critical lawyers. I have told my own team and colleagues that I am a gender-critical person, mainly because I wanted them to tell me if they thought I was letting my own views cloud my objectivity doing my job. I don't fear speaking out openly now, but I am in the priviliged position of being the head of employment law for a very large listed company. I think they would have to think very long and hard about sacking me, particularly for expressing a protected belief. I'm obviously very careful that I express my beliefs in a measured and respectful way, even if expressing them in a measured and respectful way would be seen as some people as hateful per se.
What has happened to those policies within the company, supporting the mantras - do they still exist?
Inclusive policies are good, and they exist. The clients now understand that the Equality Act 2010 contains 9 protected characteristics, and often the rights of those 9 groups can conflict and should be balanced. Gender-neutral toilets were suggested (at the expense of women, obvs) and I explained the law. Another policy was proposed which would make certain actions (which are protected) dismissing offences and I explained the law.
The main bit is getting people to understand that inclusion of some groups can mean exclusion of others. As I was talking today I received an invite from the employee resource group to a bingo session on site with a drag queen from off the telly. I explained that while that was inclusive for some people, it may well be very exclusive and offensive for some women and the equivalent of blackface. They have just never even considered that, because the Stonewall position is so well entrenched.
0
0
THIS!
Great post, Tom, thanks. Some food for thought there.
1
0
What an interesting post, Tom F. Thank you.
1
0
this is a towering achievement, a magnificent and perhaps crowning new entry in the cannon of unfunny
0
0
"Bravo, Sir!"
Erm...
0
0
biggest difficulty is freedom of religion versus liberalism per se.
Can you have for example a full LGBTQ2S? burlesque evening in way that is inclusive for a super conservative christian or muslim employee?
0
0
I don't think you can even have a trans inclusive women's changing room in a way that is inclusive for a female Muslim employee, Billy, let alone a burlesque evening.
0
0
And in any case, gender ideology isn't liberalism, it is a religion.
0
0
sorry was using the modern american parlance of liberalism rather than ACTUAL liberalism as a philosophy - i am an adhereant of the latter but not the former.
I think US ideology needs to be contained as its highly polarising and neither the right nor the left over there have attractive positions.
1
0
Yeah, but of course this shit originated in the US.
It is a country which values individual liberty over collective responsibility, where standards of education are deplorable, where politics is deeply polarised between the conservative right and the "liberal" "left", and where most people have traditionally held strong religious beliefs.
Unsurprisingly, the result is an ideology entirely centred around the individual, riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies, based around the idea that everybody has a magical gendered soul.
Whilst the conservatives still cling to their traditional religions, the liberals have largely abandoned them as being inconsistent with their beliefs around matters such as abortion rights. But Americans just aren't cut out for atheism. They need to believe that their lives have some deeper meaning and that we are more special than other animals, and so magical gendered souls is what has come along to fill the void left behind by the abandonment of organised religion by most liberals.
Because conservatives still believe in God, and not magical gendered souls, this further cements gender ideology as being an essential component of American liberalism. Questioning it will see you likened to the religious conservatives, which would be unthinkable.
And because standards of education are so poor, even educated Americans lack the critical thinking skills to see this ideology for what it is. In fact, the more educated they are, the less likely they are to question it, simply accepting that it must be real because it is what their tribe believes, and that people who don't see the point of gender are simply too thick to understand things the way they do. (They will never admit that they don't understand it either; nobody wants to be the first to point out that the Emperor is butt naked.)
Join the discussion