Comply or else
You will repeat the lie or you will be punished.
Queen’s University Belfast has toughened up its code of conduct so that refusing to recognise someone’s self-declared gender is now a “zero tolerance” disciplinary matter. Specifically, the university’s new code demands that both staff and students use whatever name and pronouns an individual demands. Failure to do so is now treated as bullying and / or harassment.
It also applies to anyone who makes “derogatory” jokes about transgenderism.
All jokes are derogatory. There shall be no joking.
This new code covers not just staff and students but anybody who sets foot on campus, including outside contractors like cleaners, caterers, and suppliers, and anyone hired by them. This means if a building firm was hired to do repairs at Queen’s, and then hired a subcontractor to supply scaffolding, that subcontractor would be bound by the code of conduct too.
If, for example, this hypothetical scaffolder were then to encounter a 7ft tall, balding, bearded student who demanded to be referred to as a female, they would be under an obligation to accept that person’s declared gender identity without question, despite not even having signed a contract with Queen’s.
Well, except what could Queen’s do to them? Surely nothing? It can do things to students and employees, but not to outsiders.
But who knows, maybe they’ll just start flogging people. It will be nostalgic.
I expect there will be contractual language added for primary contractors, possibly with financial penalties; said contractor will be responsible for all subcontractor’s violations, as well, thereby obligating the primary contractor to place similar language in the subcontract, and so on.
Pronouns shouldn’t be a part of anyone’s job, except, of course, English teachers and writers.
I wonder if such universities will start to find it hard to sign up any contractors. “Sorry, we’re busy until 2070.”
If a Christian university expected its students to affirm their believe in God and the various dogmas of their particular sect on a regular basis or risk getting kicked out I’d probably be ok with it. However, if a previously secular university suddenly changed it’s code of conduct to require students to affirm belief in a particular deity I’d be much less supportive. It seems unfair to current students who aren’t religious or who are of a different religion, but what about students who sign up after the new code has come into effect? They can’t say they didn’t know what was expected of them.
How much power should universities, or businesses in general, have to dictate what their staff, or students/customers can say* on site or off? Who gets to define what counts as offensive speech?
*Not just say of course, they want you to behave as if you believe it, even if you don’t, with no outlet for you to express your true beliefs.
I’m wondering if they actually have the power to do this, or whether they merely believe that they do, because Stonewall UK has misinformed them about the law in this area. It would be interesting to see how any court case will go, given the precedents in England, the invoking of a section 35 order after the Scottish parliament tried to pull a trick which fell foul of existing equalities law, and the continuing ideological divide (currently under a cease-fire) in the six counties.
Given Belfast is in the UK part of Ireland, this seems actionable by any party to run afoul of or object to this rule. Hopefully.