Do you secretly judge people who announce their pronouns in their emails?

[Mewmin]

I was reading the thread on BBC pronouns earlier and it got me thinking about my own reaction when I come across people who I had previously respected and looked up to who have put their preferred pronouns in their email signature (all female with obviously female names like Annabelle and Rebecca).

Personally I believe it shows a lack of critical thinking and, working in the academic field, I am finding it very difficult not to alter my view of the (very) few colleagues and work contacts who have done this. In one case it has actually made me think twice about working more closely with someone.

Am I alone in this?

I should add that I am supportive of transpeople's rights but don't think that they should override women's rights and I cannot go along with the lack of logical thinking and tautological definitions used in gender ideology.

its not far off listing your sexual orientation, religion and any disabilities in your email signature

I do know someone with profound hearing loss who has this in her email signature, but only because people keep asking for her phone number.

But @AlbaAlba in your first example why do you need to know their gender at all? It should make no difference whether you are communicating with a man or woman.

In your second example of people with a gender neutral appearance and name and no way of finding out (which surely must be highly unusual) why can't you refer to them by their name if you're worried about using "they"? Eg "Suresh sent me a copy of this report and said that there are some inaccuracies in it. I think this was in reference to paragraph 3 etc." instead of "Suresh sent me a copy of this report and she said that there are some inaccuracies in it. I think she was referring to paragraph 3 etc".

@AutumnBrooke

But *@AlbaAlba* in your first example why do you need to know their gender at all? It should make no difference whether you are communicating with a man or woman.

In your second example of people with a gender neutral appearance and name and no way of finding out (which surely must be highly unusual) why can't you refer to them by their name if you're worried about using "they"? Eg "Suresh sent me a copy of this report and said that there are some inaccuracies in it. I think this was in reference to paragraph 3 etc." instead of "Suresh sent me a copy of this report and she said that there are some inaccuracies in it. I think she was referring to paragraph 3 etc".

I also don’t think ‘they’ draws a spotlight on anything in the second example either.

“Suresh sent me a copy of this report - they said that there are some inaccuracies in it. I think this was in reference to paragraph 3 etc."

I would not even bat an eyelid at that, let alone think the sender a) didn’t know if Suresh was man or female or b) thought Suresh was trans or non-binary.

How can you normalise people being they/them if no one uses they/them in written comma without it being unremarkable?

The whole thing is borderline bonkers.

I see it at work all the time
It feels like Virtue signalling at its best

When I see this it's usually from young women, and yes, I do judge them as gullible, virtue signalling, a bit thick, easily manipulated and uninformed. A few times now I've gone to follow someone on social media, seen their pronouns in their bio and not bothered. Haven't seen it much in a work context yet, but I would definitely have less respect for anyone doing this. If I were asked to do this at work and it was truly unavoidable, it would be a no-brainer for me to use he/him pronouns. There's no way I would be encouraging prejudice against me in the workplace after women have fought so hard to make sex irrelevant in this context. Play the bastards at their own game. What's offensive about all this is the pretence that people have ever had any choice as to how we are referred to. So it's now a choice? OK, seeing as I've never related to this notion of being cisgendered anyway, you can call me a man and treat me with the same respect as one. If trans people expect everyone to bend reality around them I expect the same.

But you are at work. You shouldn't be attaching your work identity to your political beliefs on a controversial issue.

I am happy that opposing discrimination isn't seen as a controversial issue within by workplace (the NHS).

the other ridiculous thing is that if it were genuinely useful email directories in these organisations would be full of different combinations of prounouns xi/xer, ze/zim, and loads of they/them. Instead it's a smattering of she/hers in HR and diversity and a couple of they/thems. I've never seen a he/him I don't think. As usual, it well intentioned women going along with this and doing it to ourselves ...

In my organisation there are two trans people. One has been passing for a longtime and not everyone knows she is trans. She says the last thing she'd want to do is put she/her as she'd be one of the only women doing so and it would just point out that she was trans. The other one has a goatee and obvious penis (arrives in tight lycra cycling shorts) and looks nothing like a woman, she puts she/her. No he/hims whatsoever, despite management encouragement for us all to use pronouns. Tell me everything I need to know about this silly fad that hasn't been thought through properly (harms women and transwomen in the workplace)

@Stompythedinosaur

But you are at work. You shouldn't be attaching your work identity to your political beliefs on a controversial issue.

I am happy that opposing discrimination isn't seen as a controversial issue within by workplace (the NHS).

Including pronouns is supporting discrimination against women - but fuck them, right?

@NoSquirrels and @AutumnBrooke

Because, as I explained, in my 1st instance, I have to initially address everyone by their title. Those are the cultural norms in the countries I work (I work in diplomacy, we really can't waltz in with a 'hey Jim!', many countries are far more formal in the UK, at least initially). Fine when it's Prof, Dr, but I frequently don't know whether to go with Mr/Ms etc.

In the 2nd instance because when you're using other languages, many languages are very gendered (English far less so), so if you use their name you need to follow it by a gendered form of the verb... Even where there does exist a gender-neutral form in a particular language, you'd have to convert every single verb into the neutral form, which would be very very obvious.

I can see that it would be a potential issue in a language with gendered verbs. Is it general practice in countries with these languages to specify their pronouns in their email though? I'd be surprised.

In the 2nd instance because when you're using other languages, many languages are very gendered (English far less so), so if you use their name you need to follow it by a gendered form of the verb... Even where there does exist a gender-neutral form in a particular language, you'd have to convert every single verb into the neutral form, which would be very very obvious.

Ah - yes, in other languages it would be much more obvious. Fair enough! In English though it is - and should be, IMO - unremarkable.

Yes I do

@The90swereadecadeago

Email signatures are going to look like Twitter bios soon.

Kind Regards,
X
Remainer/FBPE/BLM/I stand with Corbyn/Tory Scum/Anti-European Super League is pro-Brexit/Hate Brexit/Jaffa cakes are a biscuit. Podcast here: (link)

take on the European Super League, and here it is in all its glory.

Or

Kind regards,
Woke/Wanker/virtue signalling consultant/right on/left voter/anti vax/saga cruiser/baby boomer

Perhaps ?

I like it. I work in a male-dominated industry with many names that are not traditionally English, and with less face to face contact then I'm used to. I like having it spelled out for me as it makes me less likely to refer to someone by the wrong pronoun.

How common is specifying pronouns in other countries? Depends on the country: European, more frequent; Asia-Pacific, less so but many of the younger elite have been educated in the west and so it's increasing. MENA, hardly ever. And even in Western Europe, most cultures are more formal professionally and use titles until people know each other well, so it's an issue.

I'll step back now though, this is very niche and a bit of a tangent from the general discussion, just wanted to say it can sometimes be helpful.

For those that do it to be ‘inclusive’ could you explain in what way it is inclusive and not exclusionary to those who aren’t comfortable sharing, for instance those who wish to keep their preferred gender identity private, those who don’t support the perpetuation of gender stereotypes or those with autism who find it provokes a stress response when reality and what they are being told they see?

Fine when it's Prof, Dr, but I frequently don't know whether to go with Mr/Ms etc.

That's a good example of why pronouns are unhelpful. 'They' or a 'neopronoun' leaves you none the wiser. 'she' doesn't inform you whether Ms, Dr, Mrs, Prof, Miss, Rev etc is correct. . If you're in a domain where titles are the norm, then the signature needs to contain a title, not a pronoun.

Yes

People have managed until now without having to declare pronouns. I once turned up to a job interview with someone called 'Sandy'. I was expecting a woman and it was a man. As I had never been in this person's presence and thus hadn't referred to them in the third person, they didn't know my expectation. Even if they had, so what? It's an easy mistake to make, hardly the end of the world. Adding pronouns is making 'misgendering' seem like a crime, it isn't!

@Novelusername Yes, I had the same thing the other way round with a Terry. It wasn't a problem. I just thought, 'oh, okay, Terry's a woman' and got on with it.

I do a little, I just think it's slightly look-at-me-i'm-so-progressive. My gender has absolutely no bearing on my ability to work and given systemic discrimination against women in my field, I'm not exactly keen to open myself up to that with no good reason. Someone referring to me with an incorrect pronoun is such a non-issue.

I also don't really understand how it fits into the whole TRA debate. I assumed asking someone their pronouns in real life was a courtesy if they look androgynous and was meant to help their gender presentation or something, but there's no relevance of that in an e-mail, as I'm not assuming their gender incorrectly based on their appearance.

I don’t see it where I work happily but maybe it’s coming. I will never add it to my own emails though as I think it is ridiculous and I hate being compelled to do something like that

It doesn't bother me if they do. People can do what they want, but I'd be careful to keep everything polite and professional, and would not chat or be casually friendly the way I would with other colleagues.
The pronoun crowd tends to be in search for something to be offended by and I can't be bothered to deal with that much drama.

@Stompythedinosaur

But you are at work. You shouldn't be attaching your work identity to your political beliefs on a controversial issue.

I am happy that opposing discrimination isn't seen as a controversial issue within by workplace (the NHS).

The same NHS where there are only seven BAME Directors of Nursing of NHS Trusts in the entirety of NHS England?

The NHS where senior management (medical/nursing/organisational) often referred to as "the snowy white peaks"?

That NHS?!

As has been said upthread. It's a gimmick and nothing more than that. It does absolutely nothing for "inclusivity".

@JaneJeffer

I watched a programme about makeup artists the other night and they all had their pronouns after their name on screen. Why? It's not as if the viewer is going to be addressing them.

This was Glow Up, right? I saw it too. (Hadn't seen the previous series.) The whole presentation was so achingly "right on"!

The pronoun thing (I think only one person did identify as trans but think this was pretty obvious anyway).

And also the mix of ethnicities. As if this is unusual nowadays. Most progs do it, it reflects the make-up (pardon the pun) of British society, so why does it have to be underlined and put up in neon in this way?

And the two autistic people very much wearing the autistic "badge ." I have an autistic son who also has severe learning disabilities and he has no idea whatsoever (as far as I can tell) that he is even disabled! He certainly wouldn't sit around talking about the significance of " masking" etc, as some highly articulate autistic people do.

NB I'm absolutely not saying that there should not be a mix of ethnicities, or that autistic people shouldn't be on such a programme, or that no-one should be trans. But all this drawing attention to these things as if they are the main issue. It's a bloody make-up programme, for god's sake!