Staff outing - only ladies invited

ArcticRoll

I've changed some of the details for fear of the story being recognised but I'm a Civil Servant.

The office manager sent an email out this week, to all members of staff:

"We are arranging an office meal on 1st June, just for the ladies. Men feel free to make your own arrangements for your own outing"

Which kind of irked me a bit. I didn't see it as necessary to exclude men. There was no particular reason given aside, presumably preference of not having men there. Given that it was sent as an all-office email I thought that wasn't really on. If it was a private event arranged privately by friends at work who all happened to be women it would be one thing. But this seemed a bit discriminatory.

So I responded back asking why the event was only for women and stating my objection and belief that the event should be opened up to everyone and it was no more acceptable for a manager to say "just for the ladies" as it would be "just for the whites" or "just for the heterosexuals". The manager was quite obstinate on this until today when suddenly an email went round announcing the whole event was cancelled.

Okay it's not the worst example of discrimination in the world but it still makes me feel kinda crap. As a gay man I don't always feel comfortable in an environment with all men. There might also be trans people in the office whose trans status is not declared to management who would be put out by that.

To be honest I'm kind of peeved that the response was the cancel the event rather than open it up to everyone. It wasn't a ladies specific event going on, it's just a meal at a mixed-gender establishment but the manager evidently preferred only women to be there.

Now I'm kind of concerned she'll have it in for me going forward.

PasturesNew

You were right.
She was wrong.

You're probably right that she'll have it in for you as she must've had somebody having "a quiet word" in her ear and she's seething.

You are right.
She is wrong.
But she has to power to make you suffer.

Ms_Chocaholic

How long have you worked there?
Does this office manager manage you?

ArcticRoll

She's one of a group of managers who work there, the senior among 4. I've been there over 2 years.

NitinParmar

Personally I think it's wrong, considering it was sent to everyone but exclusively excluding men.

If that was the other way around it would be a different situation I am sure of it.

It's not a problem having a ladies only night but be fair and send it to just the ladies, don't send it the men and expect them to just be ok with it.

nicechap

ArcticRoll wrote: »

I've changed some of the details for fear of the story being recognised but I'm a Civil Servant.

The office manager sent an email out this week, to all members of staff:

"We are arranging an office meal on 1st June, just for the ladies. Men feel free to make your own arrangements for your own outing"

Which kind of irked me a bit. I didn't see it as necessary to exclude men. There was no particular reason given aside, presumably preference of not having men there. Given that it was sent as an all-office email I thought that wasn't really on. If it was a private event arranged privately by friends at work who all happened to be women it would be one thing. But this seemed a bit discriminatory.

So I responded back asking why the event was only for women and stating my objection and belief that the event should be opened up to everyone and it was no more acceptable for a manager to say "just for the ladies" as it would be "just for the whites" or "just for the heterosexuals". The manager was quite obstinate on this until today when suddenly an email went round announcing the whole event was cancelled.

Okay it's not the worst example of discrimination in the world but it still makes me feel kinda crap. As a gay man I don't always feel comfortable in an environment with all men. There might also be trans people in the office whose trans status is not declared to management who would be put out by that.

To be honest I'm kind of peeved that the response was the cancel the event rather than open it up to everyone. It wasn't a ladies specific event going on, it's just a meal at a mixed-gender establishment but the manager evidently preferred only women to be there.

Now I'm kind of concerned she'll have it in for me going forward.

I agree with Pasturesnew assessment & advice.

But now's your opportunity to organise a night out for the whole team and show them what they'd miss if they had gone out without you.

TELLIT01

The manager messed up, at least in the way it was done. I have no problems with a 'Girls Night Out' any more than I have with a 'Boys Night Out'. Both events should have been organised by management, not by telling the men they were free to organise their own.
The OP may not feel comfortable at all male events, but some of the women may not be comfortable at an ostensibly 'girls' outing with a bloke along. The opposite might also be true.

ohreally

Perhaps she would benefit from some equalities training!

Wasn't sir Jeremy Heywood (head of civil service) yelping on about "speak up if you see behaviours which could exclude colleagues", or was that just a crock of schit?

Takeaway_Addict

Well done OP, don't feel bad that its cancelled

ReadingTim

Poorly worded, but given the civil service has a reputation for being somewhat 'pale, male and stale', women-only networking groups/events are no less a minority group than (say) ethnic-minority only networking groups, or LGBT groups; and no less valid to include or exclude those who don't, as well as do, fall within their remit.

I assume that any such LGBT groups that you might be involved with are similarly inclusive in respect of heterosexual participation? Or is "just for the heterosexuals" bad, but "just for the gays" ok?!?

Takeaway_Addict

ReadingTim wrote: »

Poorly worded, but given the civil service has a reputation for being somewhat 'pale, male and stale', women-only networking groups/events are no less a minority group than (say) ethnic-minority only networking groups, or LGBT groups; and no less valid to include or exclude those who don't, as well as do, fall within their remit.

I assume that any such LGBT groups that you might be involved with are similarly inclusive in respect of heterosexual participation? Or is "just for the heterosexuals" bad, but "just for the gays" ok?!?

The difference is this was clearly not a formal meeting or group