Just been told to remove my pronouns from my Teams profile

I asked you how a woman would feel alienated in OP's situation (in being given the opportunity to add pro-nouns).

She has said that she's now left it blank, so it's obviously not mandatory.

Of course making it mandatory could be alienating for various people.

Yeah, i should have put it on inverted commas coz i didnt mean it asxacgiven but as an idea

Sometimes i feel i live in a different world to other people.Where are these 'most men who identify as women' behaving in a way that is threatening to women? I live just outside of London and work in London and I have never, ever been attacked or threatened or even looked at funny by a trans man or woman. I dont see 'middle aged men stomping around in skirts and tights' as someone put it,anywhere. i have never seen a trans person in a female toilet. I have however, been threatened both verbally and physically by men dressed as men throughout my life. I continue to be concerned about violence against women and girls and continue to fight that, if that does include trans then it does, but most of the time it doesn't. You could almost say that arguing about this deflects from the actual issue. As a mum of a young teen girl, i am far more worried about Andrew Tate and casual misogyny in younger men than I am about trans.

Thanks so much for this thread @Horrace . I don't normally make new year's resolutions, but prompted by you, I have decided that anyone who tries to 'ciswoman' or 'cisfemale' me in 2026 can get to fuck. They are totally superfluous terms.

They do it because it's an effective way to get women silenced, but also because it plays into their fantasy of being a weak little woman who's so delicate that even a few mild words can cause them fear. It's so sexist I don't even know where to begin.

i am a female and I don' t know what that' state of mind ' would be

Quite. And then actually being male complicates that further.

Anyone with a basic understanding of fetishistic behaviour will also know that you don't necessarily even have to do a deep dive. See men dressing as young girls in public ie school uniform, the likelihood is that they are attracted to minors.

Why can't they use the facilities provided for their sex?

That's not the question you asked me though, is it?

Did she actually clarify that she was given the option? I might have missed it. Because in some places I've worked, it has been mandatory.

Im.not saying that I claim there is such a thing. I'm saying isn' t that THEIR argument. Or at least that's what I meant....that they claom.there is a female way of being and that they are THAT thing. And, yes. I get your point. What would that be ? I am a female and I don' t know what that' state of mind ' would be.

Utterly unsurprised that the complaint about the OPs pronoun field took the form of cry-bullying. ‘Waaah, this fwightens me.’

I don’t want to be called “guys” either. I’m not a guy!

Nice work OP, that profile entry both made a point and was funny. Shame you had to remove it.

It makes actual women a subsection of their own category (ie there are trans women and cis women), which is why people object to the term.

Personally, I've never understood what the unifying feature is supposed to be between biological women and some men that would make this a coherent category?

You are talking about a completely different situation.

OP was given the chance to add their pronouns, if they so wished, and used the opportunity to mock others.

I think that if those who have transgender identities created their own words and terms, then quite a few things would be different right now. However, that was not the strategy which was to normalise their destabilised version of the commonly used terms for their political claims.

I think that the more that people reject being emotionally manipulated or coerced in any way to use female language for male people and vice versa it will become easier for many others to do it. If that group wants to reset their thinking, I hope that they start soon.

I still get letters addressed to 'Miss Sapphire September' even though I've been a Mrs since 2014! I've kept my ex-H's surname and my Mrs title, but luckily no longer get things addressed to Mrs Topaz November instead of my actual name.

Because it is making women a subset of their own sex so that men can colonise it, and it was never used about humans before trans activists started to do so. It also assumes that we believe in gender identity, which most of us do not.

As a person with a name that can be used by both sexes, I genuinely don't see why it's useful for people to know I'm a female 'Alex' rather than a male one.
In the vast majority of jobs the sex of the person with whom you're communicating via email is entirely irrelevant. It does however alter the way in which you are treated at times, often in a way that is detrimental to women.
So my experience is that clarity about my sex when emailing achieves nothing useful at all. I am typically assumed to be a man, and the to the point 'matey' responses from men assuming this, amuse me. As does the double take if we later meet in person. The way I'm more likely to be spoken to as an equal and a person of importance when assumed to be a man doesn't amuse me. But that is useful.

Of course I am, and so are the trans people I know. They are often forced not to use the toilets at all and restrict fluids instead, if no third space exists.

Have you seen what happens when women take their concerns about trans issues to HR? Have you seen the numerous tribunals taking place because women have done just that and been vilified for it?

It's alienating if you are forced to take pronouns seriously when you don't believe in gender woo and you consider it to be an insidious and harmful ideology.

Or of Alex wants to make it known she's female, surely that's easily achieved?

The definition of “cis” means “on the same side as” - would you be able to explain why this is offensive?

So what do you think politicians, transactivists and others really mean when they chant "Transwomen are women"?

No, I am saying the language routinely used on the site is dehumanising of trans people, the majority of whom just want to live a quiet life that makes sense to them, in the full knowledge that they are not actually the opposite sex.
That posters on this thread who say "they" actually believe this or that, "they" take women's prizes and sports, "they" enjoy going in the women's changing room, "they" or "these people" do such and such.

Qualify your language.
You'd be disgusted if I wrote "these people are all terrorists" about Muslims because there is a radical fringe. Don't do it about trans people. Say "trans people who go in women's spaces/take their prizes are a problem". Don't start vilifying all trans people or talking of them as a unitary thing.