Just been told to remove my pronouns from my Teams profile

So you knew they were men with female names, @Cybiil? Is that the trans equivalent of saying 'I'm so non-racist that I don't even notice the colour of people's skin'?

If that's all it is, why did you need to be pushed on this and why are you so angry about it?

But a name isn't actually a presentation, as we all know. It's a name. You don't know it when you merely meet someone. So go on. What do you really mean by "presenting" as a woman, and why are you so reluctant to say it?

Really? It means that when I met them, they had female names and it did not occur to me that they would have been born male.

Why won't you say it?

No, please explain.

I think you know what that mean.

What does presenting as a woman mean?

I don’t get confused when addressing the trans people I work with because they clearly present as women. I did not know that they were trans for a long time while working with them, so I don’t understand why I would suddenly start using male pronouns for them now I do know they are trans.

There are so many people on this thread who are just coming across as aggressive and very black and white. I think there are nuances in this debate and it’s too polarised.

You're right, I wholeheartedly agree with you!

Yes. I understand.

You like to censure women who see the issues that you either choose not to acknowledge or you cannot understand. Perhaps if you are not prepared to have the discussion, you shouldn’t admonish other women.

I understand you have tried to justify your position. Great. It is yours to have. But instead you also censured others.

I've explained my point of view the best I can, in the context of the OP's initial post and updates. You may disagree and consider my views flawed, but I do not owe you answers that you find satisfactory. Wishing you a wonderful Christmas!

I see. You don’t want to tell me why you consider it ‘respectful’ to use people’s stated language when that language doesn’t reflect the material reality of that person’s body. Is that because you cannot explain why your choice is ‘respectful’, perhaps it is just you being kind and you have never once thought about how your ‘respect’ is just one way only.

No thanks, I won’t start a new thread because you were the person who keeps using ‘respect’ in your posts, the questions are appropriate for this thread. Yet all you can seem to do is attempt to justify your personal choices with the answer that revolves around ‘respect’ which you don’t seem to understand much about while censuring others who do see the issues about language usage.

Including that ‘respect’ you keep referring to.

I agree. I’m all for ongoing safety messaging in a business, led by policy, managers leading by example, etc. For example where meetings start by the person leading it including a short safety message. Embedding culture.

But then I can see clear as day that if the same meeting lead opens introductions with probouns, or there is a flurry of senior folk putting he hers on signatures, that too is trying to normalise and embed a similar culture. And if same said company policies use “stonewall speak”, the word sex is changed to gender, and perhaps there is enforced diversity training that assumes we all have gender identities, all these things are also to create and embed a certain culture.

NHS Fife shows when sex is relevant.

The female staff member on a shift is being forced to strip in a changing room with a male and be in the room while he strips. That was old fashioned sexual harrassment untill the managment of the UK health care system decided special men get a free pass.

He feels he also has the right to lay hands on and in a woman (or man) who requested same care from a female. That is assault / sexual assault and profesdional misconduct but the managers who write their policy are not brave enough to simply make it very clear that such conduct is not allowed.

All my answers relate to the OP's initial post and updates. You could start a thread if you wanted people's views on specific problematics?

What both situations have in common is safeguarding.

Embedding the culture of holding on to the handrail embeds an attitude of physical safeguarding.

Embedding the culture of declared pronouns leads to safeguarding breaches. Referring to Isla as a woman results in Isla being entitled to access women’s spaces. Do you really think Isla Bryson should be treated in all aspects as a woman?

“Please use whatever pronouns you’re most comfortable with especially if English is not your first language “

Thanks. But you didn’t answer the questions I asked. You tried to apply them to the OP but they were specifically about respect, as I have already said. However, you seemed far too interested in telling me I was making things up etc.

You have mentioned it again in your answer here. (“as a mark of respect within the workplace”)

The questions were

What is respectful about demands of changing language to suit a person’s philosophical belief about themselves that doesn’t reflect material reality?

What is respectful about obscured language that is inaccurate being demanded and supported by policy?

I am fully cognisant of standard corporate practices thanks. I asked specific questions in relation to ‘respect’ and how respectful it is for any person to demand language change to specifically suit their personal choices and their philosophical belief.

If you are a female person, it causes harm at a collective level.

This has been evidenced by activists since at least the mid 2010s if not earlier saying that because people use female pronouns and call them a woman, policy should treat them as a female. That it is cruel not to. Hence we ended up with male people in female single sex provisions including sport.

There are other harms as well that also involve safeguarding.

So? You can’t police people’s thoughts. You may go by pronouns that contradict who you actually are but b/c people use them it doesn’t mean they see you as you wish to be seen. They’d be something going off in their head & all it does is highlight who you ain’t to them. Making people go through mental gymnastics everytime they talk to or about you is extremely selfish & expecting people to change the definition of words is completely self entitled.

Are you required to put your pronouns there? If so id ask them to remove that & don’t ask for participation & then not like it when you do.

That was quite the slip.

But it comes down to your personal choice doesn’t it. You choose to change your language to start meaning the opposite to the word’s established meaning to suit someone else’s philosophical belief. Particularly one that has no foundation in material reality.

You choose to obscure meaning and accuracy. This has proven harmful at individual level for women and girls and collectively.

Others should have the choice not to. It is not respectful to emotionally manipulate or to use policy to coerce people to do this.

I feel like I'm Napoleon and I want everyone to address me as Emperor.

Are going to respect my wishes?

That was the approach, but it felt quite new and, I must admit, over the top at the beginning. I soon got used to it, though!