Employee using pronouns. Help!

Stating your pronouns out of choice just marks you out as a sexist homophobe.

There is a form we need to complete for pronouns to be added with a list of approved pronouns to choose from. I think there is also an open option but they would check it. I've seen social media bios with she/they I guess for people who want other people to switch how they talk about them?

Got a message today that our company are actively encouraging this bollocks

No, I wasn’t suggesting you would - I just wondered what your company (applies equally to other companies who insist on this) would do if someone refused to play ball. I wonder if anyone has done it if they were forced to add pronouns.

I'm not going to do that. So far the majority of staff ignore all the entreaties to add our pronouns - we can't be forced to publish personal information.

Spontaneous combustion or something I expect.

@EightiesRobot - genuine question, if you refused to play ball and put something like ‘he/she’, what would happen?

@NewlyGranny in this case maybe but most of the senior management in my work place have them and we are constantly told we should also include 'our' pronouns. I am fully aware that my concerns about Equality Impact Assessments on the protected characteristic of sex etc are not welcome and I need to keep my views to myself although the message is also that we should feel able to bring our whole selves to work?! It makes me feel excluded within the workplace in the same way as if everyone was to put their other political views in their email signature.

EightiesRobot, I think most of the folk scattering unsought pronouns via email were too young to vote in the referendum. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Seeing pronouns in email signatures makes me really concerned that the person is not inclusive of other viewpoints. That they would discriminate against you for your belief/understanding of biology and the impact of gender identity theory on women's rights. I wouldn't expect to see the political party they pay subs to or whether they were remain/leave in their email signature.

Although I think my colleagues all know by now.

I may add ‘potentially peri menopausal’ in mine by way if a warning then. That is far more useful than “la di dah, refer to me as her when talking about me, as I know you all do...”

Imagine if you were communicating via email with your solicitor/accountant/doctor/whatever and they had on their email signature "I'm bisexual", or "I'm Jewish", or "I vote Tory" or "I'm 64".

It would be weird, unnecessary, and incredibly unprofessional.

Email signatures are supposed to say your name, your position, your company and your contact details. They are not a space to make curious political declarations.

The 'neutral' thing to do is to not include anything political and superfluous, and keep it professional.

@ArabellaScott, one of my colleagues has a swirly, purple signature that looks very nice and is identifiable at a glance. I like it. I suppose it’s OK, unless she’s emailing someone with visual or literacy issues. Also, it might not be very clear on printed or scanned documents.

However, the colleagues who are determined to shoehorn their BA (Oxen) or MSc (LSE) into their signatures, should know that other people do snigger at this. As bragging goes, its pretty transparent and it doesn’t make them more approachable to customers.

It annoys me when I see it but I just ignore. It's not worth the battle. Being forced to do it though would make me stand up and be counted

This isn’t unreasonable bias. The industry itself is very much in thrall to the trans agenda and many women involved in it are bullied mercilessly if they are found to disagree. I want to work with someone I know will have my back and support me, should such bullying arise.

So depending on the industry, a pronoun wielding employee might well put potential clients off. It might encourage some, but I suspect the lack of pronouns would not put anyone off, but the presence of them might well do so.

So if the company in the OP has many religious clients, it may well be very bad for business.

Perhaps she could be made aware that asking people for their pronouns is potentially outing and distressing for those who might still be questioning or unsure and reluctant to draw attention to themselves. Posting her own pronouns could be problematic or triggering for such colleagues as it implies that everyone might be required to do the same.

This is what I plan to say should our company ever decide to start insisting on pronouns. For all they know I may be closeted transgender and them forcing me to either deny my authentic self or out myself before I'm ready could be massively triggering and exclusionary.

I can't see why her views are 'more inclusive' and his 'less inclusive' when we are talking about an email signature
It is very unusual to address someone you are directly emailing in the third person.

These aren’t “pronoun preferences”.

But they function in a similar way. And for pp who said it's not usual - your mileage may vary. I've seen it a lot particularly from women in Eastern Europe and (more often men) in Korea, China and Japan.

Tbh my sole objection is the knowledge that drawing attention to the fact you're a woman at work disadvantages you. I'm more for a corporate template with first name, last name and telephone number.

(in fact my biggest bug are with email sigs is with people who don't give their sodding phone bmnumber. Come the revolution...)

I see homophobia as taking offence at what other consenting adults choose to do in private. I don't see how you can be so riled about other people's sex lives without also being offended, but I'm open to people seeing it differently

Thanks for your reply, i think its because i see ‘offended’ as being very mild…I’m offended that you didn’t say hello to me

And homophobia as being much worse

Your examples would have been telling everyone they were, respectively, a (married) woman and a man, no doubt in the old-fashioned sense. Not sure why that was necessary, but there you go.

I think my lesbian vicar friend would disagree with you.

She would disagree that Christians are more likely to be offended by homosexuality????? Really????
Do you mean that she would not be - fair enough. As I said before I know there are many religious people who are truly tolerant (and my aunt is also a lesbian vicar). I think if you don't believe that if you're religious you're likely to be less tolerant, that's a bit naïve. My Aunt is certainly well aware of that.