Ms Bosch, why are you and your organisation Dreilinden advocating for LGBT*IQ people worldwide?

Ise Bosch: The question really should be: Why aren’t more people and institutions advocating for them? LGBTIQ people are among the most at-risk social groups by any measure. Trans women are almost fifty times more likely to be HIV positive than the population average, for example, and hardly anyone makes more suicide attempts than young LGBTQ people. Yet Dreilinden is one of only two foundations in Germany specialising in this field and supporting it internationally. German funding for this cause worldwide – including public subsidies – amounted to a modest 3.1 Mio. Euros in 2016. This includes 684.000 Euros from Dreilinden, which is more than the Ministry for Development is dedicating to the issue.

One of the issues we will discuss at our 2018 PROUT AT WORKconference is the situation of LGBT*IQ people in Russia as well as in Africa and the Arab world. Where do you see differences in working towards equality within the various global regions? Where do you see commonalities?

Ise Bosch: Any answer to this will have to be very general, and there will always be counter examples. But we generally find that cultures with a strong religious influence tend to reject gender diversity – not just Islam, but Catholic and evangelical Christian religions as well. So-called persecutor states with severe legal discrimination up to and including the death penalty for sexual acts between men can mostly be found in formerly colonised countries. The roots of persecution stem from colonial times – their moral laws are often still those of the colonial powers! They are an enormously powerful legacy of missionary work – by us Europeans. Structural social discrimination makes life for queer people just as dangerous as legal discrimination – in particular if a culture is strongly patriarchal, like many societies in the former Eastern Bloc, notably in Russia, Ukraine and the Central Asian republics. And where a society closes itself off and becomes more nationalistic and militaristic, gender binarity is enforced, and that invariably happens at the expense of sexually and gender-diverse people.

In your view, is there a corporate responsibility for LGBT*IQ people worldwide?

Ise Bosch: Of course! For one thing, it is simply part of their responsibility for their employees – whether these belong to the “community” themselves, or their friends or relatives do, or they simply want the freedom to grow as individuals. Companies obviously have an interest in their employees’ wellbeing, not just because productivity will suffer otherwise but simply because of their responsibility as employers. And that means they also have an interest in more liberal laws. The fact that some employees cannot be posted to Singapore because of its discriminating laws is unacceptable. But as long as these laws and social taboos exist, these employees need points of contacts within their companies who can advise them confidentially. To do this, companies must make their support for diversity and their efforts to gain the required expertise very clear. After all, it’s not just about the small number of gay and lesbian people or the even smaller number of trans and inter people, it’s about development opportunities for everyone. Sociology now knows that significantly more people change their sexual orientation during their lifetime than previously assumed.

In a 2016 study, the Center for Talent Innovation stated that companies should not underestimate the influence of their economic power in the struggle for legal equal opportunities for LGBT*IQ people. Where do you see concrete scope for action for globally operating companies?

Ise Bosch: In at least two respects: First of all, they can offer non-discriminatory jobs, and, in case of a conflict, protection. Secondly, they have very special access to local administrations, governments etc. Not just for formal interventions – via their connections as well. Powerful “expatriates” in particular meet people with all kinds of influence and can, or could, provide assistance like almost nobody else. Not just in emergency situations, obviously, but with regards to broadening horizons as well, through their more liberal attitude. Homophobia and transphobia have a strong component of plain ignorance – people aren’t familiar with the issue, they have questions, but they don’t ask them openly because they feel insecure and are afraid of some kind of “contagion”. We have to create situations that allow legitimate questions to be asked, and we need to answer them. Naturally, a face-to-face conversation and a confidential setting are the best way to do this. People with a certain standing are also in a position to change biographies for the better, even if they aren’t part of the “community”.

We live in ambivalent times. In the fourth edition of your Rainbow Philanthropy, you described both a growing understanding that discrimination against LGBT*IQ people is unjust and the fact that their situation is becoming no less, if not more, precarious. What can each of us do individually to make the world a better place for LGBT*IQ people?

Ise Bosch: Dismantle what’s left of our own prejudices! Dare to ask our own critical questions: At what point do I get embarrassed, where do my fears lie? And then speak out publicly regardless. And build real friendships. Personal friendships are an irreplaceable asset in being able to stand up for people who are different with regards to gender or sexuality. And much of it is transferrable, it applies to China just as much as it does to Chemnitz.

What do you think the future holds for the equality of LGBT*IQ human rights?

Ise Bosch: As far as this issue is concerned, globalisation is particularly powerful, and certainly irreversible. People have always expressed themselves diversely with regards to gender – but now it gets captured everywhere across our media and thus becomes visible. I expect a back and forth battle for many, many years to come, between those who feel threatened and fight this diversity, and young people who simply are who they are. However, their tools have become more powerful. I believe that in the not too distant future, “community” and help will be accessible for all gender-diverse people in some way. Even if our democratic systems are currently becoming increasingly precarious – this medial, lived diversity won’t go away. For individuals, this will be a massive step forward compared to now where most young gender-diverse people still believe they are the only ones with this “defect”.

Why are you so heavily involved in the LGBT*IQ Community?

Joschua Thuir: For several reasons, one of which is my personal history. When I was 19 and still in training, I realised that I could no longer identify with the female gender role assigned to me at birth. However, I didn’t come out as a trans man at work until I was 25, because I feared that it would cost me my career if I disclosed my true identity before becoming a state official with lifetime job security and privileges.

Being a trans person might be an obstacle to becoming a state official?

Joschua Thuir: Indirectly, yes. To join the police force, you have to meet certain health criteria that are laid down in the official police instructions PDV300. You’re checked to see whether you meet these criteria when you’re hired and when your probationary period ends. PDV300 distinguishes between men and women. When I was originally hired – as a woman – I met all the criteria for female officers, but later I didn’t meet the ones for male officers. For example, men must have at least one functioning testis, which is not possible for a trans man according to current medical technology.

So, coming out during my training and probationary period was not an option for me. The exclusion criteria forced me to lead a double life in order to continue my career: for five years, I was a heterosexual man in private, but I went to work as a homosexual woman.

Did hiding your true identity like this have an impact on your work?

Joschua Thuir: Absolutely. I constantly feared being revealed as someone who was living a lie. My efforts to pass for a woman also required an incredible amount of organisation, concentration and quick-wittedness. For instance, I had to react to female pronouns, although I didn’t feel that I was being addressed. In addition, there are some gender-specific duties at the police. Two concrete examples: I was regularly required to frisk women because of the relevant formal requirements which only permit frisking by people of the same gender (unless the situation is life-threatening). At passport control, I also frequently compared photographs of women not wearing a veil with women wearing a veil. This occasionally led to misunderstandings because of my rather masculine appearance.

In what other areas do you think your profession comes into contact with issues of gender identity or sexual orientation?

Joschua Thuir: As a police officer, I work with the law. However, our German Basic Law only recognises two genders and states that “Men and women shall have equal rights.” Police forms are thus based on a binary gender norm and are yet to include a third gender option. However, this is set to change by the end of the year, when a third gender is to be enshrined in the law.

A growing number of transgender or intersex people carry a supplemental ID. This ID card can be presented as an additional document in situations where someone is searched or asked for identification. It clarifies the legal situation and the identity of the person. It’s an aid to the police, so to speak. However, this ID card is not yet widely known.

Other points of contact can be found in asylum law. Persecution of homosexual and transgender people has now become a ground for asylum or refugee protection. Under the asylum procedure, these people must provide the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees – which processes and decides on their application – with proof not only of their persecution, but also of their sexual orientation or gender identity. In my day-to-day work, I’ve encountered people who have expressed their wish for asylum to me for these reasons.

What did you experience in your professional environment after coming out as a lesbian?

Joschua Thuir: Actually, I came out several times. When I was in training, I came out as supposedly lesbian and experienced some negative reactions from my fellow trainees. There were some verbal attacks like calling me “butch”, and non-verbal bullying like ridiculing my appearance in the communal showers. I also felt that my supervisors at the time had left me to deal with these day-to-day problems on my own. Once I was certain that I identify as a man, I didn’t open up to anyone in training any more. That’s a time I don’t want to remember. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the courage or strength to go to the next level of authority, nor did I have the relevant information, for example on VelsPol, the LGBT network in the German police, judiciary and customs authorities, to find a different way to ask for help.

And what did you experience when you came out as a trans man?

Joschua Thuir: When I came out as a trans man at the federal police force after those five years I mentioned before, the reactions were a lot more positive. But here, too, a few colleagues proved to be lacking social skills.

The next step must come from those higher up. Unfortunately, my attempts to make this point so far have been in vain. So I have to put up with colleagues who ignore me even if we are on patrol together and should have absolute trust in one another. I had to learn to deal with this.

After I came out, colleagues from the continuing education team were very interested in using my expertise. They asked me and another transgender colleague to prepare a talk for the aviation security training. To do so, I was even sent to Berlin for 2 days.

How did your supervisors react when you came out?

Joschua Thuir: The reactions of my supervisors at the time were very mixed, but by and large they ranged from positive to awkward. I asked a police trainer to disclose my identity to my direct supervisors and to ask them to forward this information to others in the command structures. I chose this approach to give everyone the opportunity to take a look at the German Transsexuals Act so that they could familiarise themselves with the topic before talking to me. Unfortunately, there was still confusion on all sides which couldn’t always be clarified or resolved.

As is so often the case, each individual has an important role to play in such situations. Committed supervisors will not tolerate discrimination. Others are less (pro)active or even shy away from conflict.

What would you like to see in future in terms of the visibility of LGBT*IQ issues in your workplace?

Joschua Thuir: I’d like to see LGBTIQ issues included in vocational training and continuing professional development because incorrect behaviour often stems from ignorance and unease. At the least, police officers should be made aware of exceptions so that when they’re dealing with people who are not heterosexual or cis-gender¹, i.e. 10% of the population, they can also fulfil their duties confidently and in a legally compliant manner.

Additionally, I’d like the federal police force – in accordance with its guiding principles – to take a stand as regards LGBTIQ employees, provide more education on this topic and have the Federal Ministry of the Interior revise PDV 300 such that trans and inter people can no longer be automatically disqualified from service in the police force. Lastly, I’d like LGBTIQ people not to feel alone either during training or later in their job and I’d like the fear of coming out in this organisation to become a thing of the past. To achieve these goals, the federal police force needs to increase the number of designated contact persons and broaden their target group by extending it from LG to LGBTIQ, as has already happened in some state police forces. The role of contact person shouldn’t just be something that is done on the side and doesn’t involve any obligations. It should be used proactively to increase awareness and counter discrimination both within and outside the organisation. Initial steps in the right direction have already been taken – I would be happy to continue this journey together, with the support of our organisation.

¹This term refers to people whose gender identity matches the sex assigned to them when they were born.

Jens, a few years ago, your book “The Rainbow Factor” received lots of acclaim from the media as well as from companies and universities. It seemed that many had previously been unaware of the business case. You are once again writing a book about LGBTI*IQ in the workplace. In your view, has anything changed?

Jens Schadendorf: Yes. Though I’d like to say this first: “The Rainbow Factor” is about Germany, with roughly two thirds about German businesses. My new book, for which I’m currently travelling in East Asia, South Africa, North America, Moscow, Rome, Paris and Amsterdam, will be published in German and English next year and exclusively focuses on “global business”. For German-speaking countries, it is indeed true: awareness for the LGBT*IQ business case has increased. However, distinctions should be made: companies have made considerable progress compared to four, five years ago, but they are still at very different levels. For example, just because you fly a rainbow flag above your headquarters for a week or two in June or allow your employees to join a CSD parade in a company t-shirt featuring a rainbow logo doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve understood the opportunities the LGBT*IQ business case offers. Still, both are a good start to improving or even just getting the ball rolling on visibility, awareness and appreciation for LGBT*IQ and the corresponding business case. In this process, globally operating German “corporates” are much more dynamic than they were half a decade ago, even if there are still deficits there. But as they say: Rome wasn’t built in a day either.

For the next step up in development, it would be important to have more actively engaged and out “role models” at the top as well, among other things. I know how it feels – I myself was located initially in the third, then in the second and finally in the first management level below senior management for many years. Out. German LGBT*IQ top dogs are more reluctant in this regard, at least compared to their English-speaking colleagues. I have every sympathy for legitimate career goals and different individual roads to happiness: but that annoys me. Those who – as top LGBT*IQ – have been blessed with many talents and opportunities must learn how to have an impact beyond power, status and money. Otherwise, they stand for the same “failure of the elites” we lament today – often unfairly. What sort of life is it when you know the price of everything and the value of nothing? Does that sound too “moralistic” or “heavy”? Nonsense. You can still celebrate work and life.

PROUT AT WORK is predominantly supported by companies. In 2017, you supported our foundation through a donation as well as through an endowment contribution – thank you so much for that! Why was this important to you? Why do you think it’s important that private individuals also support the goals of PROUT AT WORK financially?

Jens Schadendorf: As a down-to-earth Hamburg native and an economist who was “trained” abroad to be rational, I’m not prone to hyperbole. On the other hand, I’m happy to be inspired. And I think the idea the PROUT AT WORK Foundation stands for is fantastic. It is unparalleled in Germany. I also know that the road to becoming a foundation wasn’t an easy one, so I highly appreciate the fact that it was walked against all odds and the PROUT AT WORK Foundation could be founded in 2013. As a rule, I support any entrepreneurial behaviour that is willing to take risks in order to promote something “meaningful”. Even more so when – as is the case for foundations – it’s about improving “social conditions”. After all, that’s exactly what PROUT AT WORK wants, namely: “that all work environments are open to all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sexual characteristics.” At least that’s what it says on the website, and it says something similar in the foundation’s rules.

I am, as I mentioned, gay myself. And I have been, and still am, quite successful professionally, both financially and otherwise, first as an employed book publisher and now as an independent global book expert and author. It may sound old-fashioned, but I don’t care: through my work as an author on LGBT+ business topics, I can give back to a society that has made many things possible for me. And I want to do the same – in a very different way – through my private commitment to the PROUT AT WORK Foundation. Everyone needs to make up their own minds how to live their lives and how to stand up for what’s important to them. But maybe my actions will encourage others to do the same.

What do you see as the role of organisations like PROUT AT WORK?

Jens Schadendorf: It is crucial. After all, activities around LGBT*IQ topics from companies or other institutions are one thing. The other thing, however, is exactly what PROUT AT WORK provides: public relations above the level of organisations, hosting events to dismantle homophobia and discrimination in the workplace, commissioning studies about discrimination and homophobia in everyday work life, publishing guides and informational materials for an appreciative, non-discriminatory work culture and cooperating with foreign associations and organisations that pursue similar goals.

No individual company is capable of getting all of these off the ground. PROUT AT WORK pools and processes current and relevant LGBT+IQ information, builds networks, provides advice, enables mutual learning – as a foundation and thus above and beyond all institutions. “For the greater good” if you will. And at the same time for the benefit of companies and organisations, executives and employees. After all – as studies show –, LGBT*IQ diversity management goes far beyond protecting so-called sexual minorities from discrimination. Above all, it focuses on the economic opportunities and potentials that are enhanced by this protection – for all involved. Underpinning and strengthening the awareness for these interdependencies: that’s what the activities of PROUT AT WORK are about, driven by its initiators and movers and shakers Albert Kehrer and Jean-Luc Vey.

Diversity has long been a topic at large law firms in English-speaking countries. How are your staff responding to the fact that the focus is now being placed on LGBTIQ?

Positively for the most part! Some colleagues question whether it’s actually still necessary to get involved in these issues. – If you’re a heterosexual man, it may be harder to see whether and in what form LGBTs are actually still battling against prejudice and perhaps discrimination or don’t dare to come out simply because they don’t know how their colleagues will react. To be honest, it has long been overdue that we offered a dedicated network for our German LGBT employees in addition to our successful “Ally” diversity programme and thus made another statement in support of openness and diversity. No one should feel that they have to hide their identity. And the advantage for our law firm is obvious: diverse teams are more multi-faceted, more creative and therefore more successful. Besides, in a presentation Jean-Luc recently gave to us, he quoted a study according to which the majority of LGBTs still hide their sexual orientation at work and about a quarter of their energy is wasted on building a construct for the outside world. This is alarming and at the same time encouraging. It’s encouraging because we can obviously further increase our productivity by creating an open environment. That’s a convincing argument even for people who are not affected.

What objectives are you pursuing with the PROUTEMPLOYER cooperation?

Although we have already set up an LGBT network, we see a lot of potential to expand our firm’s work to combat homophobia and transphobia and thus to further improve our corporate culture. We want to send a clear signal both internally and externally. We expect the PROUT EMPLOYER cooperation to give us new impetus and new ideas. As lawyers, we need our networks, and the cooperation creates another network and helps our LGBTs to be even more successful professionally. – And here again: it’s win-win!

What activities are there at Linklaters in terms of LGBTIQ diversity?

We have been championing diversity in our firm for many years. We’ve had established LGBT communities for a long time in London, New York, Tokyo and other locations of our law firm. In Germany, we also want to extend our network for our LGBT employees, which is still quite new there, and establish it as a platform on which colleagues can get updates on current topics, events, news, etc. or which they can simply use to share their experiences. This is particularly helpful for new colleagues who don’t yet know the environment. Interconnection within the Linklaters organisation is equally important. A good example is Hong Kong, where last year the commitment of our colleagues was awarded the Silver Standard of the LGBT+ Index by the Community Business organisation. This makes us the first and so far the only Magic Circle law firm to have been awarded the Silver Standard. That’s what I want to achieve in Germany, too.

You are the diversity sponsor at Linklaters. Why is it a matter close to your heart to support LGBTIQ people?

I have too many friends, even of my generation, who struggle with the issue of coming out and suffer from being different from what they pretend to be. In my view, the legal sector in particular still lags behind the rest of society here. However, each of us can fully develop our potential and talents only if we are accepted and valued by the people around us (both colleagues and clients). I try to play a small part in this through my contribution as diversity partner at Linklaters.

What do you think are the challenges with regard to LGBTIQ diversity in your firm in the coming years?

Our goal is to achieve a corporate culture in which sexual orientation is simply irrelevant because it doesn’t matter whether a colleague etc. is “straight” or LGBT. And “it doesn’t matter” doesn’t mean ignorance, but openness. In my view, the challenge here is to ensure that the discussion which we need for opening up these topics doesn’t cause a backlash from individuals.

Mr Daub, many thanks for your time.