Gay people who define their sexuality by sex, not gender, have shared their experiences of workplace inclusion. Dan James Smith, co-chair of LGB Alliance Business Forum, argues that employers need to do more to ensure they are not compelled to conform.
If inclusion means anything at all, it means creating a workplace where everyone feels welcome. So, if one protected group reports feeling the exact opposite, a truly inclusive business would listen to their concerns – wouldn’t it?
This summer, we polled LGB workers to discover whether inclusion is working for them. Their responses, which can be found in our report, Compelled Conformity, should send a shudder up the spine of business and HR leaders who assume they have created a fair and welcoming workplace for same-sex attracted employees – and, by extension, for any workers covered by other protected characteristics.
LGB inclusion
EDI should not stifle LGB rights in the trans debate
MPs ‘openly hostile’ to preferred choice for EHRC chair
EHRC defends interim update as ‘balance of clarity and speed’
Over a third of respondents (35%) experienced social exclusion or hostility due to their beliefs – primarily the view that it’s sex, not gender identity, that defines homosexuality.
Meanwhile, two-thirds (65%) said they feel pressured to publicly agree with political opinions they do not hold.
So, what kind of views are deemed so extreme that employees feel pressured to lie and self-censor?
“I am expected to accept the ‘male lesbian’ in order to keep my job,” said one worker. “I have been pushed back into the closet… it makes me very unwell.”
Another told us he joined his organisation’s LGBTQ+ network, but was pressured to share his pronouns and wear a Progress Pride lanyard – a symbol signalling support for gender identity ideology.
“The network is only ever interested in gender issues,” he told us. “They are very intolerant of other views, as is senior leadership.”
Not a monolith
Bear in mind, this was a poll of our supporters, almost all of whom define their sexuality by sex, not gender. Other LGB people may have a different view, but that is precisely the point. We are not a monolith.
When you assume people have the same views simply because they share one characteristic – or worse, when you lump them together with people who do not share that characteristic – that’s when inclusion takes a sinister turn. It excludes the very people it is trying to help.
Nothing highlights this more starkly than our finding that 91% of respondents are uncomfortable being grouped under the broader LGBTQ+ umbrella at work – hardly surprising, when the TQ+ is unrelated to sexual orientation. Most alarming of all, however, is that business and HR leaders often take sides.
Over a third (36%) of the survey’s participants said they have been advised by HR to stay silent about views that conflict with staff LGBTQ+ groups and DEI initiatives, leading the majority to avoid expressing their views altogether for fear of disciplinary action or losing their job.
One of the respondents told us that when he publicly disagreed that “everyone has a gender identity”, the head of HR called a meeting to pressure them into changing their beliefs.
For many people, the whole debate about sex and gender is abstract; they cannot understand why some people feel so strongly about this issue.
‘Activists rule the roost’
For LGB people, it could not be more relevant to our lives, both within and outside the workplace. Unless we can define our sex-based rights, we cannot discuss important issues that affect us – such as the virulent strain of homophobia that is a common feature of TQ+ activism and discourse.
This includes such grossly insulting concepts as the “male lesbian” mentioned above. Unfortunately, it is TQ+ voices that now dominate many workplace LGBTQ+ groups. As one survey participant testified: “Activists rule the roost. They are very loud, aggressive and intimidating to any alternative views.”
Every minority group benefits when they are treated as individuals, and their concerns given a fair hearing – even when these conflict with corporate DEI policy. From Maya Forstater to Sandie Peggie, we’ve seen time and again how failing to protect employees’ freedoms of speech and conscience can bring employers to the brink of reputational ruin.
I have been pushed back into the closet” – LGB Alliance survey respondent
Sad to say, these blunders are often the result of businesses trying to do the right thing. When they have gone wrong, it is because they unwittingly hired activist groups masquerading as “independent” inclusion experts, who present equality law not as it is but as they want it to be.
LGB inclusion
True inclusion, the kind that attracts and retains the best talent, cannot be achieved through good intentions or annual gestures, such as rolling out rainbow bunting every June. It requires a bit of legwork: first, to ensure policies are lawful, and second, to give every employee a fair hearing – even (and especially) when you disagree.
That’s why we founded LGB Business Forum: to make our voices heard, and to help workplaces get inclusion right so it works for everybody, not just the staff activists who shout the loudest.
We want to spark conversations with HR and business leaders to help them understand the law, and write workplace policies that ensure compliance and fairness for all. And thankfully, 94% of the report’s respondents agree that all protected characteristics in the Equality Act should be treated equally.
It’s time to reboot workplace inclusion: follow the law, ditch the ‘no debate’ dogma, and stop pretending vastly different groups believe the same things. We’re not one big happy acronym – and we’re not staying quiet.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Diversity and inclusion opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more Diversity and inclusion jobs
