The look at me of pronouns

I was told off yesterday by my sister in law, for not using they/them pronouns for her daughter.

I was talking to my niece about her recent birthday and my s-i-l was silently mouthing something to me, from across the table.
And I had no idea what she was actually saying to me. So I thought nothing of it and then later on during the afternoon, i was corrected again.

I just completely ignored her.

I'm not getting into any of that caper and I'm certainly not going to have my language policed by my s-i-l and niece.

Fuck that.

I also cannot understand how it's remotely relevant to how I do my job.

Challenge”? Who gives you the right to do this? Someone says ‘no thanks’ you say ‘fine’.

I don’t go to work to be challenged by people who leap to join in this without considering the natural consequences of their behaviour. Pronouns today, eliminate sex based security tomorrow.

I think if they choose to tell me their reasons for not including their pronouns there’s nothing wrong with me responding with my views?

@beastlyslumber
What's your view on why it could be okay?

It’s not that I think it would be ok, it’s just that I have reservations about endorsing a person being referred to using pronouns they don’t feel comfortable with (and of course we’re talking about a person who has not been found guilty yet). But on balance I can’t see any way around it without causing greater distress to the alleged victim.

“Challenge”? Who gives you the right to do this? Someone says ‘no thanks’ you say ‘fine’.

I don’t go to work to be challenged by people who leap to join in this without considering the natural consequences of their behaviour. Pronouns today, eliminate sex based security tomorrow.

@EarthSight
The problem with that is that by saying you are fostering a culture of inclusion, the logical next step for many would be to see those who refuse to include pronouns as being fostering a culture of exclusion . You may be the exception in this, but that is how many people see women who refuse to go along with this, and more pressure is put on women to do it. Why might that be, I wonder??Could it be that women are seen as easier to push around and that they are expected to conform to gender stereotypes? Stereotypes that you are promoting by using ideological pronouns in this way, instead of biology based ones. Stereotypes which say that if you are 'she', you are expected to conform more, to be more caring, to be more 'inclusive' to sacrifice yourself for others, to not be 'difficult' to be an accepting universal mother figure for absolutely everyone in society.

I do you hope you will be vocally sticking up for those women in your workplace.

I think it’s inherent in the email signature pronoun thing that you only need a certain proportion to do it to achieve the purpose - as long as, say, 20% of staff include their preferred pronouns that should be sufficient to make it comfortable for anyone to do it who needs/wants to.

I disagree that stating preferred pronouns reflects or encourages gender stereotypes.

I wouldn’t pressure someone into stating their pronouns, although if they said they thought it was pointless/stupid/promoting an ideology I would challenge them on that and seek to have a discussion about it.

it would make it harder for people to refer to me if I asked them to use they/them instead (it doesn’t come easily or naturally to most of us to refer to individuals as they/them, simply because it’s not what we’re used to.)

I’m not used to being expected to refer to visibly male-sexed persons “she” or “her” and it certainly makes it harder for me to refer to them as such, yet here we are.

Always the women making the most accommodations, isn’t it?

I have to say I find it difficult to believe that trans or non-binary people find it difficult to express their preferred pronouns unless half the rest of the workforce is doing it too. IME they’re not backward in coming forwards in asking, or even demanding, anything else to do with their special status even when that makes others uncomfortable (eg using toilets designated for the sex other than their own).

Report your colleagues. Watched them wail and cry when they get a call from HR - because they will have no resilience.

@Waitwhat23
Essentially you seem to be suggesting that everyone's pronouns should be non sexed. No she/her, no he/him but everyone should have non-binary pronouns in order that sex and/or gender is not involved at all.
Yes, exactly.
Do you do that in your own pronoun signature? As a pp has asked, if your pronouns are she/her, why have you chosen to do that?

I explained above why I include my preferred pronouns in my signature. As to why I don’t state ‘they/them’, even though I believe society would be better if we all used gender neutral pronouns - the fact is that we currently operate within a language where we’re all used to gendered pronouns, and I don’t think it would achieve much in isolation for me to ask to be called they/them. I am perfectly comfortable being referred to as she/her, and it would make it harder for people to refer to me if I asked them to use they/them instead (it doesn’t come easily or naturally to most of us to refer to individuals as they/them, simply because it’s not what we’re used to.) Obviously if another person asks to be referred to as they/them - regardless of whether that’s because they feel uncomfortable with gendered pronouns, or because they believe on principle and that we should move away from gendered pronouns - I will always do my best to refer to them in that way.

I'm in my late 30s. Worked for the same trust/dept for 13 years. Our HR dept announced the pronoun policy at the beginning of the year that it was heavily encouraged to add them to your email signature. I refused (just didn't add them) because I don't see why it's relevant in the slightest to my job, also because I don't buy into gender stereotypes- being described as a "tomboy" my whole life would probably result in me being a he/him in this "brave" new world.... about 75% of the dept now has their pronouns on their emails.

We have had a large new influx of younger staff, all recent university leavers/ first true social media generation who all have banded together and decided that anyone in the dept who doesn't use pronouns in their email is clearly a bigot/ transphobe/ homophobe. I've had a colleague called a terf in my hearing because she refused pretty vocally.

It's one of the reasons I'm trying to leave. I feel like the inmates are running the asylum. It's definitely made me more GC and more vocal about it. I've only just started coming on Mumsnet but I finally feel like maybe I'm not the only one who feels the same way.

I’d just call them John or Mary. Their reality won’t necessarily be my reality and life is too short to pussy foot around to try to second guess people - or for that matter tie yourself up making sure that you don’t mortally offend someone. I have a hard enough time remembering people’s names or what I ate for breakfast.

@EarthSight
Do you think you are being inclusive to butch women who may be really tired of people now asking for their pronouns all the time, of being made to feel like they're not really women because people are questioning their pronouns in a way they clearly wouldn't do as often for other women who are gender conforming? Can you not see how insulting it would be for them that you wouldn't find it their preferred pronouns to be obvious?

I don’t think a person should be asked specifically for their pronouns, unless it’s in a context where everyone is being asked for their pronouns regardless of how they present. If I met a person who presented in a gender-neutral way and I needed to refer to them using third person pronouns, and they hadn’t indicated preferred pronouns, I would use the pronouns that reflected whatever I believed their biological sex to be. If I was really unsure of their sex I would probably just avoid using pronouns until I received a prompt from them or someone else who already knew them.

On the question of victims of sexual assault by perpetrators who prefer female pronouns, I honestly don’t know what the right thing is.

I find this statement a bit worrying, as to me it seems really easy to say what's right in that situation.

Do you think the rapist's preference should come before the right of the victim to speak the truth? She was not raped by a woman - why should she have to lie to make a violent criminal more comfortable? To me it seems the court is allowing the rapist to abuse and control their victim through the court process.

What's your view on why it could be okay?

Have I got that right?

And yet when I see pronouns in an email, I instantly feel that the person using them believes trans women are literal women with all that that entails ie the removal of women’s sex based rights, the removal of women only sports,being ok with trans women in prisons or refuges

Or that they haven’t beyond be kind

Now that may not of course be what that person wants to signal but that is how I feel when I see pronouns in emails

And so funnily enough I feel very much not “included”

If you have to be reminded of a person’s sex/gender in order to refer to them at all, isn’t that likely to exacerbate the extent to which unconscious biases are brought to bear?

Essentially you seem to be suggesting that everyone's pronouns should be non sexed. No she/her, no he/him but everyone should have non-binary pronouns in order that sex and/or gender is not involved at all. Do you do that in your own pronoun signature? As a pp has asked, if your pronouns are she/her, why have you chosen to do that?

How many people are we talking about here. The % is minuscule. Why is this one topic so damned important?

I deal with a contact who is deaf. He has in his email footer relevant info about how to contact him and the fact that he is deaf. This is useful. And in a business setting, relevant. Ditto when people work part time.

Because language is important @helen8220? Because being able to accurately name something is important? Especially for women. Do you think it's humane to make a victim of rape caller her rapist 'she' in court, when she can see with her own eyes, and has experienced the biology of her oppressor first hand in the most visceral way one could experience it?

If you do have she/her on your email signature, why? Why are you 'she/her'?

I completely agree that language is important, and that we need a way to refer to the category of people who have xx chromosomes (or were born with predominantly female biological characteristics but due to intersex variations do not have xx chromosomes). But why do we need a system of language that makes it difficult to talk about a person - in any context, whether or not their sex/gender is relevant to the matter in question - without referencing their sex/gender? People on this thread have suggested that reminding the person you’re emailing that you’re a woman by including female pronouns in your signature may increase the likelihood of being treated differently (less favourably), and doesn’t think apply to social interactions more generally? If you have to be reminded of a person’s sex/gender in order to refer to them at all, isn’t that likely to exacerbate the extent to which unconscious biases are brought to bear?

On the question of victims of sexual assault by perpetrators who prefer female pronouns, I honestly don’t know what the right thing is.

I state my preferred pronouns in my email signature simply because I understand, from listening to trans and non-binary people, that this makes it easier for them to do the same, which in turn makes their interactions easier and less stressful.

@Helen8220 Also, I do find it interesting to see who you are choosing to be inclusive here.

Do you think you are being inclusive to butch women who may be really tired of people now asking for their pronouns all the time, of being made to feel like they're not really women because people are questioning their pronouns in a way they clearly wouldn't do as often for other women who are gender conforming? Can you not see how insulting it would be for them that you wouldn't find it their preferred pronouns to be obvious?

I do you hope you will be vocally sticking up for those women in your workplace.

So many places pay lip service to inclusion and go full tilt down stonewall route.

As I’ve said before. I don’t give two hoots if you are gay or straight - it doesn’t have any bearing on your work does it?
Think you have a gender? - well good for you, do your job.
Want to wear ‘opposite sexy’ clothing - well as long as it’s appropriate to the rest of the office (so no boob tubes or frilly baby-doll frocks in the boardroom please).
Want to discuss your sexual activities/kinks/? No thanks - keep that for your pals outside of work. I just work with you (because I have to pay my bills).
Want to spend office hours planning the next stonewall fund raising coffee morning? When’s the BNP one then? Because that’s just as unnerving to me.

Want to have unisex loos? whoa there nelly!

If you do have she/her on your email signature, why? Why are you 'she/her'?

I don’t think it’s an either/or between providing practical support in relation to all of the many differences and needs that staff might have, and more broadly fostering a culture of inclusion and understanding of difference - they go hand in hand.

I wonder if they have access for those with disabilities. Do they provide BSL translators or have adapted computers for those with sight problems. Do they allow days off for women if they have crippling periods, or compassion leave should they miscarry? Do they allow flexible working patterns for those who have family responsibilities (children or elders?).

Absolutely - I don’t think the organisation is perfect by any means, but I’m aware of a number of colleagues who have specific arrangements due to disabilities such as partial blindness or neurological differences. In my personal experience they have always been supportive when I’ve needed time off for gynaecological problems or other things, like mental health issues

And I believe there is a pretty good support system in place for those with caring responsibilities - loads of my colleagues work flexibly due to child care or other caring responsibilities, and during lockdown it was made very clear that it was understood those home schooling would need additional flexibility and time off to enable that.