hr meeting

Some lawyers believe their concerns would not be viewed objectively.


Law firm staff are split over policies brought in by their firms which embrace gender identity ideology, with some saying they are too scared of the potential professional repercussions to raise objections.

Gender identity ideology posits that everyone has a gender identity independent of their body which they identify as, and which may not match their sex. It has been incorporated as an inclusive measure in many workplaces, but some have objected to the potential impact of such policies on areas such as women’s single sex spaces, and women's ability to organise on the basis of their sex.

"I am appalled but keep my head down", a lawyer at RPC told RollOnFriday. "We are wholly in thrall to Stonewall, whose contentious ideology is adopted wholesale, seemingly without question.".

An RPC spokesperson said, "We pride ourselves on proactively fostering an inclusive and diverse work environment. And that means that we celebrate difference because that's what makes us a better firm". However, the firm said that it made space for dissent: "It also means that we understand that opinions conflict but we respect them and seek to learn from them. Our focus has always been to ensure our people feel supported, accepted and valued for being themselves and accordingly we have multiple internal channels through which we actively encourage our people to share their perspectives and ideas in a collaborative way." 

Other solicitors referred to surreptitious discussions with colleagues. "I talk about how gender identity is taking precedence over sex in all areas, even for changing rooms and rape crisis centres - but only with certain people once we know we're each onboard", said a lawyer who asked for her place of employment to remain anonymous. "I do not feel I can discuss with other colleagues the fact that sex is still relevant in certain scenarios."

Some lawyers said their firms were adopting policies, similar to the Law Society template, which stated that everyone has an internal gender identity, and that male-bodied people should be allowed into female single sex spaces if they felt their gender identity did not align with their sex.

"Men can use women's toilets and Travers hasn't even mentioned this to women, let alone ask them if they mind, instead they just just hid it in a trans policy", said a Travers Smith solicitor. She said there was "no acknowledgement that the association with Stonewall and Just Like Us is divisive, controversial and makes straight and lesbian women feel like our rights are irrelevant". However, she said she was "Not able to raise this at work of course - the firm just presumes everyone is in favour of this pseudoscience bullshit".

A spokesperson for Travers told ROF that it provided "gender neutral cubicle toilets" on four floors of its office which "can be used by anyone, regardless of gender identity or expression", and "are in effect single sex facilities as they can only be used by one individual at a time". She said that employees could also use "single gender facilities (located on all floors) which align with their gender identity (to put it simply, a trans woman should feel able to use the women's toilets, and equivalent for trans men and the men's toilets)".

Several firms expressed surprise that their staff might not feel able to raise concerns about policies which touch on gender identity. Travers Smith "has a genuine commitment to empowering our people to speak up and let us know their views", said its spokesperson, which included its "WorkInConfidence platform, which allows employees to raise any concerns they may have in a secure, confidential and anonymous basis. Additionally our Gender Balance Group and LGBTQ+ network both provide a supportive space for people to work with the firm to ensure inclusive practices are part of everything we do".

Some law firm staff said their firms had substituted female-centric words like 'woman' for more generic terms, in the name of inclusivity. "The word woman has been banned - we are now 'people who menstruate'", claimed an employee at Allen & Overy, adding that the change "does not seem to apply to the people with prostates". A&O declined to comment, but a second source denied that any such changes had been made.

A solicitor at DWF said her firm "removed the use of the term 'mother' from the family-friendly policy in favour of the term 'birthing parent', which I can only assume most women would find offensive and off-putting". She said DWF "has been Stonewalled" and now "encourages inclusion of pronouns on email signatures, which I find embarrassing and unprofessional as it's a political statement on a controversial issue".

However, DWF's policy also had its supporters. In the RollOnFriday Best Law Firms to Work At 2022, a DWF employee in business services said her firm's approach to diversity and inclusion had been "incredible", and cited a recent update from the CEO "about the support and training being introduced for trans and gender diverse colleagues", adding, "We are lucky".

A spokesperson for DWF said, "As an inclusive and diverse business, we constantly review our approaches to ensure we are as inclusive as possible of all characteristics. Above all, it's about understanding the importance of often small but visible cues we can take to show respect and acceptance".

The split was also evident at Osborne Clarke, which, like Travers, was praised by hundreds of its people for creating a genuinely inclusive culture in RollOnFriday's Best Law Firms to Work At 2022. However, its treatment of sex was not to everyone's taste. An Osborne Clarke employee said the firm should "reconsider its association with Stonewall, whose approach towards the protected category of sex is problematic and controversial. You can have a diverse and inclusive culture without subscribing to Stonewall's increasingly extreme agenda".

As an example of the heated views, ROF was directed to the Twitter account of an Osborne Clarke gender identity policy representative, where they had accused JK Rowling of carrying out a "relentless campaign of hate" against trans people, and ‘liked’ a reply to their tweet which stated of the author, "She's an absolute cunt and I for one would love to personally kick her wormy uterus".


oc policy advocate


Liz Lovell, Head of HR at Osborne Clarke, told ROF, "We always value, and take seriously, feedback from our employees. We want all our people to feel they have space to share their individual opinions, through our employee council or through our diversity networks. This consultative approach is underpinned by our culture that encourages and enables voices to be heard".

Bola Gibson, OC's Head of Inclusion and Corporate Responsibility, added that "Our external partners, such as Stonewall, provide valuable insight and challenge. As with all our partnerships we don't view their guidance as a prescriptive set of rules. Ultimately we review any external input so it is in line with our legal obligations, and aligns with what we think is right for our people, ensuring we are a firm where everyone can thrive".

Several lawyers highlighted Stonewall's focus on transgender issues and its redefinition of 'same sex attraction' as 'same gender attraction' as a source of concern. “My gay colleague says the accusations of transphobia he would get for stating that he has a genital preference [for males] is like old school homophobia - again, we'd never discuss this more widely at work", said a solicitor. Although some firms have distanced themselves from the lobby group, many remain members of Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme.

A woman at Gowling WLG said the firm should "sack off" the controversial charity, while a solicitor at Womble Bond Dickinson rued her firm’s reliance on the pressure group. "Not a day goes by where we are not exhorted to celebrate the next Stonewall-sponsored edict”, she said: “I suspect most staff would just prefer a decent pay rise and some extra colleagues to carry the work burden".

Although many staff with concerns blamed their colleagues in HR and Diversity & Inclusion roles for driving the adoption of gender identity ideology, an HR executive working in the Australian branch of her firm said she was also worried. "We’re going down the identity politics route heavily and they don’t seem to have grasped the scope of the issue (women’s sports, prisons, employment, hospital wards etc). They are pushing fully mixed sex toilets, pronouns and a lot of training sessions around transwomen - despite the fact that most of our employees are female but most of our leadership are male". She said, "I can’t see how I can continue to work in HR and work around a framework based on how someone identifies themselves. Sooner or later I will have to look women in the eye and tell them that their sex, religious beliefs, cultural beliefs, past traumas, etc, don’t matter". 

Stonewall told RollOnFriday that initiatives taken up by its Diversity Champions "are entirely up to them and Stonewall don’t seek to influence those decisions - care should be taken not to suggest that we do". A spokesperson for the lobby group said, "It’s a simple human right that everyone, including LGBTQ+ staff, is free from discrimination and prejudice at work. Our Diversity Champions programme simply provides guidance and support to employers who want to make their HR policies inclusive for LGBTQ+ employees. We all perform better when we can be ourselves and we make no apologies for empowering companies to create working environments in which all lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer people can thrive".

Legal Feminist, a collective of feminist solicitors and barristers, told RollOnFriday, "Law firms and chambers must wake up to the serious reputational, legal and retention risk. Reputational risks due to 'overreach' by Stonewall and other single lobby groups, and the lack of real progress on progression of women and ethnic minorities. Legal risks as a result of failure to provide single sex toilet and changing facilities to meet the needs of women, and some ethnic and religious groups. Legal and retention risks because the relentless focus on trans rights, increasingly pressured pronouns policies, elimination of the word 'women', and replacement of 'sex' with 'gender', combine to create an increasingly hostile environment for gender critical women to feel safe and speak freely".

The group added that firms "must consider all the protected characteristics and refocus I&D resources on the areas of greatest need - such as the woeful under representation of women, ethnic minorities and people with disabilities at senior levels and in the most lucrative areas of work".

Tip Off ROF

Comments

Baron 29 April 22 08:42

Love how firms insist they support all views, then list support groups within their firm to evidence that which are all totally invested in gender ideology.

Anonymous 29 April 22 09:05

I'm so bored of this but know its here to stay and these types of articles generate traffic and tons of comments which us good for revenue. 

Anonymous 29 April 22 09:08

You think it's hard speaking up about nutty Trans stuff? 

Try saying something nice about Brexit, then you'll know what discrimination in the workplace really looks like.

Official Census 29 April 22 09:13

Alright, let's just cut right to the detail here. There is a simple question at the heart of this debate.

Like this post if you don't think that a man can turn into a woman by the power of imagination alone.

Thumbs down if you think that a large hairy chap can become a lady by clicking their fingers and saying it so.

Hello Chill.

Anon 29 April 22 09:23

@ 09:08 -  go on then, I'm all ears!

Potential Client Of Yours 29 April 22 09:31

Law firms making themselves look utterly ridiculous here.  Lawyers should know the law.  Instead they pay Stonewall to misrepresent the law.   Clients should treat Stonewall membership as a sign of legal  incompetence as well as an indication of how the firm treats women.   

Anonymous 29 April 22 09:38

Brexit was marvellous for repatriating control over law making to representatives who are accountable to the British public (in law and in fact). Both law and policy are now meaningfully subject to the judgement of voters. That's an improvement in and of itself, whatever you may think of the Government of the day.

Without it our vaccination program would have been materially worse, as would our response to the war in Ukraine. Stuck as we would have been in the observably weak compromise-fetishing decision making apparatus of the EU. Which has been demonstrably pathetic in response to both situations.

As the two biggest events to occur in the Western world since 2016 I'd say that's a decent start.

 

 

Ooh ooh ooh, but what about hypothetical projections of GDP! 

Stop the whatabouting before you start, all I am saying is that there are clear benefits. Whether you consider then to outweigh any perceived downsides or not.

But even that fairly moderate stance is considered too extreme for professional company these days.

he/she/whatever 29 April 22 09:44

In view of the similarity of the responses given by the HR people at each of the different firms mentioned I assume they all did the same gender studies degree.

genderpaygapwarrior 29 April 22 09:44

This is an excellent way to close the gender pay gap and get more women on the board and into senior partnership positions.

Just let Gary, Tom, John and Frank know that there is a financial bonus available to them if they want to identify as women. Then when they do so pay them the bonus, and move them on your Gender Pay Gap data into the women column. Hey presto! Gender Pay Gap closed and more women in senior positions.

You can thank me later.

Anon 29 April 22 09:52

Oh come on, nobody at Travers believes for a second that Work In Confidence is actually confidential, but it was brought in because it’s recognised you can’t say anything that goes against the two loudest voices’ (pro-Stonewall) take on diversity.

Anonymous 29 April 22 09:53

Just a bunch of hate-filled women. 

Judy Carter 29 April 22 10:04

Misogyny runs rampant non shocka

PeacefulCleric 29 April 22 10:22

It's pandering to mental illness. 

And 99% of people know that. 

But the 1% shout the loudest on Twitter.

Anon 29 April 22 10:51

Hang on! OC has an “employee council”? Oh, they mean our, very much one-way communication, “Hub” where comments/feedback disappears into a black hole and is essentially used as a limited focus group by management and the ‘representatives’ are told not to share anything discussed…

Hussein 29 April 22 10:53

This goes for all strands of identity politics.

Unfortunately a lot of the stuff that's being promoted on ethnic and racial identity is quite authoritarian in nature.

It's so bizarre when HR departments circulate newsletters telling people to read Ibram Kendi's "How to be an Anti-racist" or even worse, Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" a work from a white American activist-businesswoman that's bordering on the conspiracy theorist.

I've had my fair share of discrimination when growing up. But really, the way forward as a society and democracy can't be. It's time for decent, civic minded people to stand up and open up honest debates.

Yawn 29 April 22 11:15

Not another ROF TERF-bait article. If everyone is so upset, why don't you just resign and go hangout with Rowling and Alison Bailey. Give it a rest. 

P's and Q's 29 April 22 11:36

"Just a bunch of hate-filled women."

Hate-filled 'boob havers', I think you mean.

 

 

No, wait, I remember now. Boob havers was last years terminology, and we don't call them that anymore because of the Patriarchy. This year it has progressively changed to 'Walking Dual Mounted Funbag Possessors'.

It's so hard keeping up with all the new diversity words, isn't it?

Way of the dodo 29 April 22 11:40

Stonewall needs to go the way of the dodo. An utterly hateful, misogynistic and homophobic organisation. 
 

Hopefully, the tide will start to turn against this trans insanity and women can get their spaces and words back. 

Ioan Wade 29 April 22 12:23

Any ideology that purports to *compel* through social punishment or even legal channels, everyone to *lie* about reality, is authoritarian. 

To demand that employees compel is offensive. 

How many of these employers will insist or "pressure" their employees to declare their religious/non-religious affiliation; political affiliation; sexual orientation; blood type/star sign/shoe size etc for some nebulous concept of "inclusivity" which is *impossible to achieve*. 

Inclusivity is "Everyone welcome here". It does not me "Everyone is welcome if they follow our "rules" and those who refuse to even if those rules are lies are not welcome". 

A certain leader is currently insisting that all its people *lie* about a certain war that the country is waging. That is Authoritarian and a dictatorship. 

"Gender" Ideology is the same. 

Anonymous 29 April 22 12:27

Identity politics is making working environments cringy and people are getting angry with it being shoved in their faces all the time.

Most people don't care what people identify as or who they are attracted to. This has all gone too far and common sense flew out of the window some time ago. All companies are obsessed with these narratives and virtue singalling and it is driving people crazy. Any opinion slightly right of these ideologies or even challenging them are met with being labelled as a nazi or a bigot or racist of transphobic, losing your job, being 'cancelled'. People are afraid to state their opinions now and this is not the way to a healthy workplace or society. Firms are all for diversity apart from diversity of opinion. People are afraid to say what they really think about all this from fear of backlash, but trust me the conversations happen.

The sooner we all address each other as human beings rather than what identity pot we should be in the better. That is real progression. I am afraid all of this is just pushing people apart and causing resentment between people.

Anonymous 29 April 22 12:31

Firms signing up to diversity awareness, inclusion, equality and anti-discrimination has nothing to do with making staff feel safe or better at work its simply another + point they can put in the tender document or beauty parade. Its not real. There was a recent instance of a firm that signed up to a ton of diversity and inclusion initiatives whilst at the same time battling 2 race discrimination cases which they eventually paid up on.

Warren 29 April 22 12:35

Gender identity ideology posits that everyone has a gender identity independent of their body which they identify as, and which may not match their sex. 

It's not an 'ideology', it's a fact.  Doctors have for a very long time accepted that trans people are a rare but perfectly normal human variation, in exactly the same way being gay is.  If you want to pretend you know better then basically you're no better than an antivaxxer or flat-earther.  Time to grow up people.   

Anon 29 April 22 12:48

For those who criticise Rowling, have you read what she has actually said, or have you just blindly jumped on the bandwagon of hate?

I'm gay for Anna 29 April 22 12:49

"Doctors have for a very long time accepted that trans people are a rare but perfectly normal human variation, in exactly the same way being gay is."

Are you suggesting that those doctors have accepted that a gender identity which exists independently of the human body is a medical fact?

Because the that's what the statement you're responding to is about.

 

 

As ever, nobody anywhere is denying the fact that trans people exist as a phenomena.

What is under challenge is the idea that one could ever actually change from being a man to being a women (i.e. that one could ever do more than just put on a passable impersonation of one for an extended period of time).

The First Amendment 29 April 22 12:58

Announcing your preferred pronouns is one of the most narcissistic things you can do. It is not anyone's obligation to validate your identity and your gender expression.  You must try to fit into the world, not make the world fit around you.

Anonymous 29 April 22 13:00

Ooh let’s all punch down on a tiny minority while drawing attention to a culture war issue our lawbreaking government wants to inflame as a wedge issue between now and 2024. RoF suffering some brain rot here.

PeacefulCleric 29 April 22 13:02

"Anon 29 April 22 12:48

For those who criticise Rowling, have you read what she has actually said, or have you just blindly jumped on the bandwagon of hate?"

 

You must be new here  ;)

Bandwagon all the way.

 

The Oracle of Delphi 29 April 22 13:11

Anonymous 29 April 22 09:08

You think it's hard speaking up about nutty Trans stuff? 

Try saying something nice about Brexit, then you'll know what discrimination in the workplace really looks like.

but there is nothing honestly nice to say about brexit, so are you accusing dawning reality of discrimination?
 

i suppose that is at least on point here

Anon 29 April 22 13:43

The firms that have gone along with unlawful guidance for a pat on the head from stonewall are going to look abit silly when the whole thing implodes. Can't wait.

Anonymous 29 April 22 13:49

"but there is nothing honestly nice to say about brexit, so are you accusing dawning reality of discrimination?"

There you go, look at that one there, absolutely barking mad. Yet every office in London has at least one just like them.

There's a perfectly reasonable post at 09:38 for them to engage with, but they just can't do it. Almost as if they can't physically see it. For them everything needs to fit a pattern of dogmatic absolutism in which they can conclude by stridently declaring something nuts like "there is nothing honestly nice to say about Brexit" and can't bring themselves to acknowledge that actually there is some good to go along with the bad, whatever the ratios may be. 

What's amazing is that they are often supposedly intelligent people working in skilled jobs, and yet they've willing closed themselves away in that parallel reality in which they honestly believe that Brexit, such as it is, is a Manichean darkness which emanates only evil and that anyone saying otherwise is actively aiding and abetting that dark and malign force and therefore deserves to be castigated for their sins.

On almost any other public policy topic they would recognise that kind of position as being actively insane, but on Brexit there are tens (possibly hundreds) of thousands of people who have collectively lost their marbles and become totally unmoored from reality. It's remarkable to watch.

Suspect a strong correlation between those views and militant TWAW-ism.

Anonymous 29 April 22 13:50

@ "Just let Gary, Tom, John and Frank know that there is a financial bonus available to them if they want to identify as women"

 

Not sure you'll find many people with those names in law firms. 

Anonymous 29 April 22 14:06

"Ooh let’s all punch down on a tiny minority while drawing attention to a culture war issue our lawbreaking government wants to inflame as a wedge issue"

Yes, that's right isn't it.

It's the people threatening to rape and murder JK Rowling, or being fired for saying that they think a woman is an adult female, who are being 'punched down' upon.

And it's the Wicked Tories inflaming this whole culture war* by using mind control rays to force Stonewall (et al) to push it in workplaces up and down the land, and then post endlessly on Twitter about how anyone who questions them is a bigot and a transphobe. Which is all a cunning plan to make the electorate think that 'progressives' have lost their collective minds and shouldn't be trusted with sharp objects, never mind running the country. 

That's exactly what's happening here.

 

 

 

*for newer readers who may be unfamiliar with some of the more technical terminology being used here, a 'culture war' is the academic term that we use to describe a reasonable discussion about public policy in which progressives aren't getting their way. Its opposite is a 'national conversation'. 

Correct usage of the phrases might go as follows:

"I'm so sick of this divisive culture war over trans-womens right to compete in sporting events!"

and

"We need to have a national conversation about the importance of allowing trans people to compete in the womens one hundred metres"

Anonymous 29 April 22 15:06

I expect certain gender-critical folks are sending the poll round various groups outside the legal sector, who are all clicking frantically away on the "I have concerns and am terrified to raise them" option. What usually happens when this happens is that they completely overdo it and the results are so disproportionate and out of whack in terms of number of respondents that it is obvious that it has been gamed.

Anonymous 29 April 22 15:23

Sure, Anonymous 29 April 22 15:06
 

“people don’t disagree, it’s all a lie”

You know this, how?

I personally know a lot of my fellow lawyers have issues and won’t raise them.

(I voted once)

Anonymous 29 April 22 15:28

"I expect certain gender-critical folks are sending the poll round various groups outside the legal sector, who are all clicking frantically away on the "I have concerns and am terrified to raise them" option."

Absolutely, that's definitely what's going on here.

It's not that the vast majority of society disagrees with our vogueish progressive opinions and thinks that we're completely out of touch. We aren't really being outvoted by a large majority. It's all a sinister conspiracy of dark forces rigging all the polls against us.

Why, I'll bet that it's probably the very same Russian botnet that Stole The Referendum and then tricked everyday working Americans into thinking that Hillary considered them contemptible riff-raff. No doubt about it.

That is an accurate account reality.

 

 

Keep your eyes forwards. Under no circumstances are we to look directly at the elephant.

Anon 29 April 22 15:35

This has all been done under the carpet at the behest of Stonewall. They redefine homosexuality without any consent and lable people as transphobes if challenged.  Stonewall promote the law as they would like it to be not as the law is. Strange indeed then and risky that any law firm would sign up to be ' advised'. They treat gay people as a monolith and we just aren't.

Firms who do this are just virtue signalling. Most boards don't have a clue what they are signing up to. They are paying to lobby for Stonewall. Imagine being that stupid.

Of course, the darker side of Stonewall like trying to bully black, Lesbian Barrister Alison Bailey or supporting an ideology which is at its heart, deeply homophobic and misogynistic isn't ever discussed.  Let's not forget about Appleby v Tavistock, the Cass Review and the cancellation and attacks on women.

Everyone wants people to feel safe and good about coming to work but this isn't the way. You don't impose ideology on a workforce in the same way you wouldn't ask your staff to say a morning prayer.

This has a limited shelf life imo. Compelling people to change language is how ideologies control narrative.

The Oracle of Delphi 29 April 22 15:40

Suspect a strong correlation between those views and militant TWAW-ism.

er:

thinking trans women are women = denying the plain and obvious

thinking there have been any indisputable benefits to brexit which even cause a ripple in the tidal wave of downsides to brexit = denying the plain and obvious

i think we can both see where the side of fantasy sits here…

Anonymous 29 April 22 15:47

Ah yes, the peace, love and be kind brigade. Until you disagree, then it’s a punt in the uterus!

feelingchill 29 April 22 15:48

great article here from rof - i particularly enjoyed all the interviews and comments from trans and non-binary people where they explained how the policies helped them feel comfortable and supported at work

wait a second…

Tom Fun 29 April 22 16:18

These comments are pure GOLD.  As are the thumbs up and down.  MEGALOLZ

freelindaradlett 29 April 22 16:27

Delighted my firm has done none of this performative nonsense to date. I won't join in if they do. 

I inwardly judge the pronoun in email crowd - Irwin Mitchell I mean you 

Anonymous 29 April 22 16:39

"thinking there have been any indisputable benefits to brexit which even cause a ripple in the tidal wave of downsides to brexit"

Ahh, but now you're trying to retrospectively modify what you first said because you realise that you've made a fool of yourself by behaving in precisely the kind of absolutist fashion I described.

The original poster said 'anything nice about Brexit', someone else asked for an example, and my reply to them was very clear in stating that there was a discussion to be had about whether the undisputable benefits, the nice things which objectively do exist and can be listed out, truly outweigh the perceived downsides.

But because you're the kind of censorious muppet that the OP was describing, who has a reflexive need to shout something rude at anybody who you perceive to be anything other than 100% critical of Brexit, you failed to notice any of that in your rush to honk self-righteous claptrap about how there was absolutely "nothing honestly nice to say".

Which is why you're here now trying to scrape the egg off of your face by pretending that you actually didn't really mean it like that and were always saying that you were making an 'on balance' judgement, that it's actually me who is the silly one, and by implication people shouldn't therefore regard you as the kind of extremist crank that you so indubitably are.

 

Hard to imagine how the OP could have been proved more correct. You've done the job for them admirably.

Not a TERF 29 April 22 16:55

Wow, seems like much of this far from impartial and far from balanced article and comments has been driven by the gender critical ideology 

Anonymous 29 April 22 16:56

"i particularly enjoyed all the interviews and comments from trans and non-binary people where they explained how the policies helped them feel comfortable and supported at work"

It's a disgrace isn't it.

There was no balance in the Stephenson Harwood article either, which was clearly incomplete without reporting the views of several SH partners about how comfortable and supported they were going to feel as a result of getting all of that money to spend as a result of cutting homeworkers wages by 20%.

It's just such irresponsible journalism.

I mean, what's next? Articles on women being raped in supposedly all-female prisons without any kind of input from the perpetrator saying how much they enjoyed it? How could we possibly judge the merits of such events without the full range of viewpoints from all stakeholders? 

Anonymous 29 April 22 16:58

but your 9:38 isn't reasonable.  the first para is only a theoretical benefit because we are still in fact following EU rules (and will continue to do so) but have given up all control over them.  that's something we always had the theoretical ability to do, so no change.

and your second para is just nonsense.

Anonymous 29 April 22 17:13

The gender neutral toilets at Travers are also the disabled toilets. Generally one of the reasons for having disabled toilets is to ensure that people with disabilities have dedicated facilities that they may need to use in a hurry (e.g. as a result of their disability). Combining the two therefore doesn't seem like the best solution. 

Anonymous 29 April 22 17:13

Not one person challenging firms’ position on this thread seems to have given any thought to the way Trans people might feel. This is not some academic or theoretical point; these issues affect real people who are already suffering disproportionately from discrimination and for whom life is often unusually hard.  Have any of you considered checking your privilege?

Anonymous 29 April 22 17:33

"the first para is only a theoretical benefit because we are still in fact following EU rules (and will continue to do so) but have given up all control over them"  

Totally wrong. And exactly the same kind of parallel reality vibe that I described earlier. 

While it's right to say that the UK has retained a huge volume of law which originated in the EU, it does have the right (in law and in fact) to depart from that retained law as its elected government sees fit. Further you will recall from reporting at the time, because it was something of a major issue in relation to the trade deal negotiated between the UK and EU, the ECJ's jurisdiction no longer extends to the UK so it is no longer subject to judicial oversight by the EU.

We know the above to be true, because we can go and look at Hansard to see records of the current UK government repealing, replacing and amending retained EU law on a daily basis. It literally happens every week, and it is widely reported in the broadsheet press (even in the Guardian, albeit always with commentary suggesting that each such deviation represents an epoch defining disaster in and of itself).

So you can see why I think it is odd that you seem to imagine that we are living in a universe in which the UK is 'still in fact following EU rules... but have given up all control over them'. Because that is the exact opposite of the situation currently taking place in real life, in which the UK is following only the EU rules which it chose to retain, and has the power to dispose of or modify them as its elected government of the day may see fit from time to time.

Again, the only way that you could be ignorant of the above is if you were actively going out of your way to avoid looking at facts which contradicted your cult-like desire to see Brexit as some kind of black and white issue in which no nuance is possible and everything about it was Bad with a capital b. 

But, mad though that is, there are thousands of you. All doing the exact same insane thing together.

 

"and your second para is just nonsense."

You will understand why this part of your post did little to disabuse me of the notion that you are largely incapable of having an informed discussion and that you don't really understand what you are talking about.

Bored of this 29 April 22 17:37

Goodness what a fuss. In the UK there are more members of Girls Aloud with convictions for assault in toilets than trans people.
Maybe firms doing their bit to ensure that trans people are supported at work and able to use their services isn’t the end of the world? Throughout history there have been people pointing at minority groups and accusing them of all sorts of things. Those people have never once been right, they aren’t right now. Instead of further kicking one of the most maligned minorities around, how about we have an honest discussion about how we can design facilities that work for everyone.

Orwell 29 April 22 19:04

@Bored of this, if you think this is about assaults in toilets, you are profoundly lacking in awareness of the topic.  And its "with" not "of".

Orwell 29 April 22 19:07

"Not one person challenging firms’ position on this thread seems to have given any thought to the way Trans people might feel."

Wrong, but please by all means keep assuming things that support your worldview.

Tobina Greendam - person on the land 29 April 22 19:41

I used to get arrested for wandering around in the ladies with my willy out.

Now I'm stunning and brave.

Excellent.

Anonymous 29 April 22 19:47

Why do people keep calling trans folk the most maligned?

Hate crimes against trans people are almost non-existent.

Sexual assaults by trans women against bilogical women however......

Loads.

Goebbels would have been proud of this sort of propaganda.

Anonymous 29 April 22 20:28

re your 17:33, your second para earlier was about vaccines and ukraine, claiming the uk’s actions in those regard were only capable because of brexit.  if you don’t know that is utter rubbish there’s no hope for you. the uk could have acted in exactly the same way if in EU. re vaccines even boris accepted that at one stage, although he probably lies about it more often now.  

re uk changing eu laws that is of course a possibility (but then parliament was always sovereign in truth) and some tinkering around the edges has been started i accept. until something substantive actually changes though i think it’s fair to describe that “benefit” as theoretical.  but if you think putting crowns on pint glasses is a real benefit then ok let’s do that balancing exercise….hmmm wonder which way the scales are tipping?

 

Anonymous 29 April 22 20:32

Law firms think they're doing the right thing by embracing these weird ideologies - it comes from a good place but they need to realise that most post people simply don't agree with agree with these ideologies and find them alienating.

Surf 'n' TERF 29 April 22 21:10

Anonymous @29 April 22 17:13 – you commented "have any of you considered checking your privilege?"

The overwhelming majority of transwomen are white, middle class men. How much more privileged can you get?

You also said "Not one person challenging firms’ position on this thread seems to have given any thought to the way Trans people might feel. This is not some academic or theoretical point; these issues affect real people...". 

Gender ideology is very much theoretical. It's the triumph of objective viewpoints over substantive fact. Women's rights are being infringed on as a result of trans rights activists' demands to not hurt their "feelings".

Anonymous 29 April 22 21:12

Notoriously predatory male partner at my shop has made numerous jokes about how our trans inclusion policy now means he can be in the female changing room whenever he likes, he just has to declare he’s a woman.

Anonymous 29 April 22 21:19

Anyone like, spoken to any trans people to see what they think and how they feel? Thought not.

Anonymous 29 April 22 22:20

Anonymous 29 April 22 21:19

Anyone like, spoken to any trans people to see what they think and how they feel? Thought not.

 

Objective reality doesn't care how you feel.  And wearing eyeliner and a dress won't make you into a woman.

Do you know what women call "living as a woman"?

Living.

Anonymous 29 April 22 22:25

“Anonymous 29 April 22 16:39

"thinking there have been any indisputable benefits to brexit which even cause a ripple in the tidal wave of downsides to brexit"

Ahh, but now you're trying to retrospectively modify what you first said because you realise that you've made a fool of yourself by behaving in precisely the kind of absolutist fashion I described.

The original poster said 'anything nice about Brexit', someone else asked for an example, and my reply to them was very clear in stating that there was a discussion to be had about whether the undisputable benefits, the nice things which objectively do exist and can be listed out, truly outweigh the perceived downsides.”

You didn’t understand the post.

They (he or she… can I say that?) are saying there are no indisputable benefits - i.e. the benefits you claim are disputable.

Probably being a dumbass led you to vote Brexit and still try to promote it? Everyone knows it is a failure now, even if it might have been something else.

 

Anonymous 30 April 22 04:58

What a load of bollocks

Anonymous 30 April 22 07:35

So this comment section went exactly how ROF expected.

 

Throw in a trans article and basically set off a grenade.

 

All the mad hatters are in here.

HRPartner 30 April 22 08:56

If one of my team decides to identify as a trans woman, can I immediately reduce her/his salary by 20% or do I have to wait until his/her next pay review?

So....... 30 April 22 09:02

If a lay-person holds themselves out as a solicitor it's a criminal offence under section 21 of Solicitors Act 1974.

If a biological man holds themselves out as a woman there are no consequences.

What happens if a biologically male lay-person holds himself out as a female solicitor? Is this a loop-hole that they've missed?

Orwell 30 April 22 09:21

Anyone like, spoken to any trans people to see what they think and how they feel? Thought not

Yes. I have family and friends who transitioned years before the TRAs hijacked the agenda who are equally alarmed. TRA =/= transfolk, a fact TRA supporters are keen to silence.

Orwell 30 April 22 10:35

The TRA lobby is not for people who feel profoundly they were born in the wrong body and want to live as though they were the opposite sex. Nor is it for people who feel uncomfortable living as what a man or a woman is "supposed" to be like.  

No, the TRA lobby is for men who want untrammeled access to spaces reserved to women. That's it. They are no friends to transfolk, promote a profoundly misogynistic ideology, and very very deliberately have tried to shut down discussion of what they are doing to avoid examination.

Anonymous 30 April 22 11:17

Trans rights are human rights.

feelingchill 30 April 22 17:55

 

Anonymous 16:56:
 

It's a disgrace isn't it.

There was no balance in the Stephenson Harwood article either, which was clearly incomplete without reporting the views of several SH partners about how comfortable and supported they were going to feel as a result of getting all of that money to spend as a result of cutting homeworkers wages by 20%.

there’s no duty on rof (imo) to be balanced in all the stories it runs - my point was only that this particular article (titled “Lawyers split over their firms gender inclusivity policies”) featured a dozen quotes from lawyers who were against their firms gender inclusivity policies and exactly one generically in favour (from the dwf solicitor) drawn from their annual survey

this despite (according to the article itself) having access to “praise from hundreds of people” at osborne clark alone - as well as travers and it appears dwf - for creating an inclusive culture at those firms

now rof can run whatever stories it wants (and it appears to have gotten the clicks and comments from many who agree with it!) but you can’t pretend the article isn’t imbalanced 

or who knows - maybe it’s just meting them out like the firm of the year results and next friday they’ll run an article with a dozen interviews and quotes from people in favour of their firm’s diversity policies

i guess we’ll see

Anonymous 30 April 22 19:27

If we are deciding that sex-based rights and innate biological differences have primacy, then we also have to be more understanding of certain male behaviours, given that it is not a man’s fault that testosterone makes men bigger, stronger and more aggressive than women.

Anonymous 30 April 22 19:57

Anonymous 30 April 22 11:17

Trans rights are human rights.

And if you consider trans women to be women and actual women not to be human, that makes perfect sense.

Anonymous 30 April 22 20:15

"Trans rights are human rights."

 

I mean, rapists' rights are human rights too, if you want to start making a list.

Or was it just supposed to be a catchy slogan that we weren't supposed to really think about?

Maximal Black Sabbath Singer Turn urrr... my page you Clerk. 01 May 22 01:37

Here at our workplace, we let all colleagues use the WC. In our office we have a lovely women who greets us by using her penis to urinate on the toilet seat before us uterus havers sit down on top of her lovely female urine from her female penis. Sometimes she allows me the pleasure of using the tissue to wipe her penis urine before i sit down. She is so kind and loving.

We believe in peace and love. But naturally peace and love cannot be extended to those who are not themselves peaceful and loving. Like the evil JKR who dared to give so much of the money they earned from scratch to what they deemed noble charitable causes. How we laugh at they.

Anonymous 01 May 22 07:44

Instead of further kicking one of the most maligned minorities around, how about we have an honest discussion about how we can design facilities that work for everyone.

I think people are generally open to that, but that isn’t what we are seeing. Much is being done with no prior consultation and with some active hostility to countervailing opinions.

How can we have an honest discussion in such circumstances?

Anonymous 01 May 22 07:53

The best part of firms new obsession with trans rights is that most firms have higher maternity than paternity entitlements (because they are in the 60s), so men can just declare as women and get proper leave entitlement.

(Yes I know this isn't how it works on a number of levels, just making the point that if you don't have equal maternity/paternity entitlements (or even better, just one parental policy) you think women are meant to be at home and men are meant to be at work).

Anonymous 01 May 22 09:59

Lot of boring folk on here.

 

Bore off. 

 

Get a life.

 

 

Anonymous 01 May 22 11:20

I wonder if the real problem here is that a lot of people are threatened by all the new and different ways of being a woman that trans women embody.

Next time you see a woman with a penis why not say "wow!  that's amazing" and just embrace it?

Anonymous 01 May 22 17:06

Men are just bigger, stronger, faster and more sexually dominant than women. It’s biology, it’s sex and it’s innate. Laws and policies, from sports to workplaces need to take the testosterone premium into account.

Anonymous 01 May 22 20:39

Anonymous 01 May 22 17:06

Men are ... more sexually dominant than women. 

If by sexually dominant you mean sexually incontinent then yes, I suppose it's true.

Anonymous 02 May 22 09:53

People are down voting having equal parental leave policies?

I cannot begin to imagine the gammons that would be against such a thing.

Or is it a millennial thing?!

Either way, why would anyone be against equality?! 

Anonymous 02 May 22 14:05

"Either way, why would anyone be against equality?! "

 

Because we're all into Equity now, you fascist.

Equality has a disproportionately negative impact on BIPOC communities and is a well known tool of White Supremacist oppression.

Anonymous 02 May 22 14:08

"Men are just bigger, stronger, faster and more sexually dominant than women"

 

But if you are a woman reading this and thinking "no wait, I don't agree with that, I'm a woman and I am immensely sexually dominant" then can you please load up Lawyr and ask to connect with me. Username is @STypeSSC.

Thank you in advance.

And please may I have another.

Anonymous 02 May 22 17:49

Such a shame that nowadays I feel compelled to vote for the Reform Party or the Tory Party. I was left of centre but this topic has turned me into a single issue voter - literally nothing is more important. Only Tice and Johnson know what a woman is.

Lol 02 May 22 23:35

Such a shame that nowadays I feel compelled to vote for the Reform Party or the Tory Party. I was left of centre but this topic has turned me into a single issue voter - literally nothing is more important. Only Tice and Johnson know what a woman is.

Ha! Vg. I bet there are some gammons who genuinely try to kid themselves that voting for the party of male sex pests or the Putin stooge Tice would actually be voting for women. As if getting it right on simple science for once rules out all their other abuses…

nonny 03 May 22 11:57

Very bored of RoF pushing gender critical ideology. No, I don't want beardy trans men in the women's loos. No, I've never had a problem with trans women using them. I don't know which of my colleagues have a penis; I can infer that the men with kids probably have one hidden away, but thankfully, I don't work in the sort of office where we display our genitals to each other. Some of you lot really do sound like a sexual harassment claim waiting to happen.

I appreciate that we're now putting pronouns in our signatures not least because it saves the awkward moments when one has to guess whether the various Sams and Robins and overseas colleagues with non-English names are "he" or "she". Cannot believe how worked up some people get over easy steps that don't affect them.

Anonymous 03 May 22 12:43

I wonder if RoF will dedicate as much time to a piece on how law firms with offices in states making abortion illegal once Roe vs Wade is overturned will support women.

Anonymous 03 May 22 15:23

"bet there are some gammons"

Yes, quite right.

Only the wicked Gammons* disagree with us. A lost cause.

But even if regular commoners did disagree they wouldn't dare to vote for The Wrong Sort Of Person instead of ticking the box next to one of the candidates approved by their moral betters.

So I don't think we need to worry about the possibility of a national plebiscite going drastically wrong in a way that we totally fail to see coming. Such a thing could surely never happen. The plebs have always voted the way that they were told (and that the wise Experts predict). Right?

That's what will happen. So we can all relax without any need for introspection.

 

* Do not accuse me of racism. That's something I am entitled to do to you, not the other way around. Know your place, peasants.

YO' MA (identifying as YO' PA) 03 May 22 18:59

Karens of the world unite! And fight! For your right!

Orwell 03 May 22 19:10

 bored of RoF pushing gender critical ideology.

It's not. It's showing the range of opinions outside of TRA ideaology, which I appreciate is a hideous terrifying prospect in the eyes of the TRA movement.  And it's "bored with".

Anonymous 03 May 22 21:56

People who menstruate and birthing parent are just ridiculous, reductive, nonsense and double speak. Men don’t give birth. Women do. Why obscure that fact for the validation of a mentally ill tiny minority?! We don’t define men by their body parts of bodily functions. Or am I justified in referring to my male boss as a sperm producer? Testicle haver? Why is it only women being erased?! 

Its truly disturbing the extent to which these firms have been captured by gender ideology and Stonewall’s dogma - which is harming so many young people (nothing mentioned about the life long implications of puberty blockers and hormones, or the devastating effect on (usually) young women who detransition and end up mutiliated). In a few years when the tide turns - some of us will remember those that went along with this dangerous, homophobic and misogynistic ideology- that thought it was progressive to make the safety of women and children an afterthought.  
 

 

 

Aramis 03 May 22 22:05

So pleased to see the tide finally turning on this insidious ideology. 

Most women I know are slowly becoming aware of what is really happening and how it will affect us, our daughters and grandaughters unless we put a stop to the Stonewall gravy train who want to decimate women's rights in favour of men's rights, because that is what they are, MEN. 

I have trans acquaintances, or I did, watching their vile, misogynistic behavior on social media made me realise they are just men pretending to be women but using their male entitlement, aggression, and misogyny to get what they want   

Anonymous 03 May 22 22:51

Interestingly the religious right in the US is leveraging gender issues to win the war on legal abortion. Take a look at pro-life nut job Jack Posibiec saying “we must accelerate the contradictions”. Grimly ironic that gender critical positions are being used to diminish women’s rights.

Anonymous 03 May 22 23:09

A man with a penis claims he's a lesbian.  A heterosexual married couple call themselves queer.

Words have lost all meaning and the middle classes have got too much time on their hands.

Anonymous 03 May 22 23:11

The war on legal abortion is why we need absolute coalition between all women, non-binary people, and all LGBTQ people. The 'culture wars' are coming for all our bodies, all our autonomy, all our choices. Everything else is a silly sideshow.

Anonymous 04 May 22 12:06

"we need absolute coalition between all women, non-binary people, and all LGBTQ people. The 'culture wars' are coming for all our bodies"

 

You are the culture wars.

You've only started calling it that since you started losing, I grant. But don't pretend that anyone but you started it.

... And stop trying to pretend that trans-stuff has anything to do with abortion rights. Nobody is letting you hitch your nutty ideas to that bandwagon.

Anonymous 04 May 22 12:24

"Next time you see a woman with a penis why not say "wow! that's amazing" and just embrace it?"

 

What, their penis?

What if it's just a normal not amazing one?

The Dowager Lady Gaga 06 May 22 08:24

Quite, that vulgar woman is thoroughly traducing our family name. Mind you, the rot set in back in the 1980s with my late husband's attempt to run a radio station...

Related News