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.

@ChairmansReserve I get it. I did say it's imperfect. But your point is not an eyeroll is it. I just don't want to be involved in a conversation that dismisses this stuff as 'woke nonsense' because I don't think it is.

@ThePlantsitter
I didn't use the word 'woke' or the word 'nonsense'.

I also didn't say that the idea that putting your pronouns in your email can challenge gender norms is 'imperfect'. I said it's 'wrong'. Because it is.

The two ideas are antithetical.

One rejects the centrality of socially-imposed gender norms and attempts to treat other people as human beings who are capable, or incapable, of performing a professional role regardless of their sex, gender, sexuality, age, weight, ethnicity, marital status, disability, political affiliation, number of children, number of pets, and so on.

The other - putting your pronouns in your email - centres all of these things, saying that people should in fact be forced to reveal personal aspects of themselves that have no relation to their ability to do their job, and that they should be judged on them.

To suggest that the latter position is anything but horrendously reactionary is just wrong. Not 'imperfect'. Not 'woke'. Just wrong.

Just to add here that you cannot be forced to do this. Employers cannot make you. It is always optional.

It's about challenging the construct of gender,

How does it do this? I think it's about reinforcing gender stereotypes. The trans people I know fully embraced the gender stereotypes of the opposite sex when they transitioned, changed their names and pronouns to match because they want to pass unnoticed.

I've spent the morning doing some traditionally masculine tasks, I wasn't wearing make up or heels. I'm still female as are my pronouns. I didn't feel male whilst I was using power tools and I wasn't worried that my tools and dress would make anyone else think I was male. I refuse to acknowledge gender or feel constrained by it. Insisting on pronouns as way of signalling gender identify forces me to participate in the current gender obsession. I resent that.

Bit different but I judge being asked by employers to declare my nouns - as a point of solidarity -offensive. It was strongly encouraged to declare my pronouns on email signature. Well no, I won’t, because all my life people have correctly identified me without me having to declare it. And it really isn’t a big concern for me, abs other things are. Do people in work want to talk about my big concerns in today’s society? No they damn don’t. So why do we all have to uniformly get behind “one big thing”.

Presuming your adult child is not reading this, you could just be truthful. 'They' are not a 'son or daughter' , are they? They are your son, or your daughter. And you know exactly which one they are.

I do, in terms of sex, yes. But I also know that they would find it extremely upsetting if I was using words that they no longer identify with behind their back, just because they weren't listening. So I am trying not to, particularly on threads like this one, where I think the experience of parents for whom this is not a theoretical debate are worth articulating.

Also - why would you assume that the child in question is not reading this? There will undoubtedly be people reading this that as shocked as I am about the snap judgements that are being made about their employability, personality and lack of social skills, by people who have never met them.

I didn't say you did say that. Others on this thread have. In fact I said 'your point is not an eyeball is it' meaning you were not being reactionary about it.

I do not agree with this:

putting your pronouns in your email - centres all of these things, saying that people should in fact be forced to reveal personal aspects of themselves that have no relation to their ability to do their job, and that they should be judged on them.

It doesn't say people should be forced to do anything. It doesn't say they should be judged on them. It is not a reactionary stance.

You know what? It gets right on my tits and my instinct IS to do a reactionary eyeroll when I see it at the bottom of emails. I don't state my pronouns myself. But I really think it is intended as a nod to inclusivity and to allow people who may want to identify or present themselves as something other than that which the pronoun culturally denotes to do so without fear of castigation or mockery from the person writing. So I choose to think about whether my initial reaction is based on critical thinking or frankly an ingrained mistrust of gender fluidity. There are people behind the pronouns.

I agree with you that declaring what pronouns to use it is probably the wrong way to do it and have said so upthread - BUT I think it is up for discussion. I don't judge or dismiss people who do it or - for fucks sake - toss them from job shortlists, and I don't assume they are snowflakes or narcissists as many on this thread are suggesting. Not you, for absolute clarity.

@AChickenCalledDaal I do, in terms of sex, yes. But I also know that they would find it extremely upsetting if I was using words that they no longer identify with behind their back, just because they weren't listening. So I am trying not to, particularly on threads like this one, where I think the experience of parents for whom this is not a theoretical debate are worth articulating.

I have never suffered from gender dysphoria, and I desperately hope that my children don't either. I have, however, spent decades in the grip of eating disorders and self-harm (closely related to GD). I know for a fact that I would have found it extremely traumatising to hear my mum's perspective on my weight and my body when I was at inpatient-level anorexia - however, just because I, in the worst moments of my mental illness, would have found it very upsetting, doesn't mean that she should have 'supported' me by telling me that yes, I was correct that I still needed to lose more weight.

Also - why would you assume that the child in question is not reading this? There will undoubtedly be people reading this that as shocked as I am about the snap judgements that are being made about their employability, personality and lack of social skills, by people who have never met them.

I don't believe that the people writing those posts are making 'snap judgements'. I think you do me and many others a disservice in assuming that we haven't spent a great deal of time thinking about this, very seriously.

I do find it a bit strange and gender has never really been important to me, but I have done it as an act of solidarity once or twice. Basically trying to make newly transitioned people feel at home in my work or in my class (I'm a lecturer). Once the person seems comfortable I take it off.

@ThePlantsitter

It doesn't say people should be forced to do anything. It doesn't say they should be judged on them. It is not a reactionary stance.

1 - Forced
As you'll see from this thread and many others, many people are in fact forced, or at least heavily pressured under threat of action (which comes to the same thing) to include those pronouns.

2 - Judged
By including them, you are inviting people to include those in their assessment of you as a human being. I do not want to draw people's attention to my femaleness. It's not relevant to my work (99% of the time).

3- Reactionary
Yes, it is reactionary, in the sense that it reverts to a (not actually very long ago in the scheme of things) time when people were absolutely and always judged and divided and categorised, first and foremost, by their sex, as well as their race, age and other characteristics.

Look at some job adverts from the 1950s and 60s. No problem there in recruiting openly for 'young, attractive women', advertising differential pay grades for men and women, or sacking women for getting married. Funny how it's only after those have become illegal that men are happy to call themselves 'she'.

But I really think it is intended as a nod to inclusivity

It probably is 'well meant'. That doesn't matter. The effect and impact is what matters, not the intention. That is a basic principle of law and many other things (because intention is unknowable but impact is real).

So I choose to think about whether my initial reaction is based on critical thinking or frankly an ingrained mistrust of gender fluidity. There are people behind the pronouns.

I think you miss the point that many of us have (had to) spend a great deal of time thinking about this. For what it's worth, I have a PhD in Critical Theory and have taught it (including Gender Studies and Queer Theory) at universities. I know this stuff inside out. As do many others who don't have the academic credentials as evidence.

Don't assume that those who disagree with you have spent less time than you thinking about it. The opposite may well be true.

I don't assume they are snowflakes or narcissists as many on this thread are suggesting.

I've explained above why I believe it is extremely narcissistic to highlight aspects of your own personal identity when it's completely irrelevant to the job you are meant to be doing.

The announcing of pronouns in emails always feels odd to me. When I started work around 20 years ago many women including me, were making a conscious choice to use Ms rather than Miss or Mrs in a work context - because my marital status is completely irrelevant to whether I can do my job or not.

Within this context the move now towards announcing pronouns strikes me as really odd and regressive. In the same way someone doesn’t need to know if I’m married, they don’t need to know my pronouns.

It’s often work policy. My DH has been told he has to include his pronouns on his email signature.

It has been talked about at my work but so far we don’t have to. My signature does have Mrs in it so it’s probably quite obvious that I would use she/her.

ChairmansReserve My reference to snap judgements was about people saying (for example) they would bin CVs on the basis that the person stated their preferred pronouns on LinkedIn. I stand by the view that is a snap judgement about a person, and potentially discriminatory.

I absolutely don't mean to imply that people haven't thought very hard about the issue. So have I and I have come to the view that it is better on balance to support my child and I hope that will mean that their gender dysphoria can be managed at a level that we can all live with and not lead to potentially much more scary and drastic decisions on their part.

None of this is easy, but you clearly know that, even if our views differ.

I definitely judge, for all the reasons Chairman and others said. And, were I to be in a position of recruiting someone, I would certainly look askance at those CVs specifying pronouns over those that didn’t.

Drawing attention to a person being female has been demonstrated time and again to disadvantage women. I judge anyone who thinks that is ok.

just counting down the days it happens at our work ...

@AChickenCalledDaal My reference to snap judgements was about people saying (for example) they would bin CVs on the basis that the person stated their preferred pronouns on LinkedIn. I stand by the view that is a snap judgement about a person, and potentially discriminatory.

I wouldn't do this (the binning thing) purely on the basis that I agree it is potentially discriminatory. Although I'm not sure what protected characteristic you'd be discriminating on?

I have no choice but to work with many people who have their pronouns in their emails (as I said above, the vast majority of whom work for organisations rather than for themselves, and are clearly under some pressure to do so).

I do think it reflects poorly on the person as an individual, and privately would think less of them for it, not least because I think it indicates someone who goes along with prevailing norms rather than having the courage to resist them.

I absolutely don't mean to imply that people haven't thought very hard about the issue. So have I and I have come to the view that it is better on balance to support my child and I hope that will mean that their gender dysphoria can be managed at a level that we can all live with and not lead to potentially much more scary and drastic decisions on their part.

I appreciate that you have come to that conclusion. I have to disagree with you though.

Without going into loads of detail here or revealing any more personal histories, I think that when parents think the best way to support their child is to go along with their decisions/beliefs that fly in the face of reality, they're usually doing this because they are scared of alienating their child, losing contact with them, being seen as the enemy.

In practice, the child takes that as an acceptance of, support for, and reinforcement of their decision/position, and it pushes them further along that road. (Not referring only to gender dysphoria here, it applies much more broadly.)

So the parent thinks they are doing the right thing by supporting their child and showing that they love them. The child (who is already having that belief reinforced from other places as well) takes that as a strong additional support for their belief. ("See, my mum, whose opinion I respect, agrees with me.")

And I think that in reality, what it does it to smooth and accelerate their development in that direction, and encourages them to move to 'the next level', and I think it does in fact lead to the 'scary and drastic' steps being taken, because the child feels happier and more confident to take those steps, knowing they have that parental support.

I've had these arguments before (again, not in relation to GD, and in my personal life rather than online) but sometimes the hardest, but most necessary, part of parenting is to use your child's love and respect for you (and yours for them) to tell them that actually, in this case, they are making a wrong decision, and much as you will always love and support and help them, you can't - precisely BECAUSE you love and support and want the best for them - shore up this specific step that they are taking.

Sometimes children respect and listen to their parents more than we might think they do.

@Shehasadiamondinthesky

Yes I bloody well do judge them for being absurd and ridiculous. I'm very near retirement and everyday much much nearer to telling people to just fuck off.

@Shehasadiamondinthesky me too, thank goodness!

In the zoom work meetings I go to there’s an increasing tendency for people to have it in their zoom screen name, which feels really in your face to me. Surely if you’re going to include any additional info after your name then the organisation you work for might be a bit more useful than your pronouns?

I remain shocked at the number of people who are freely admitting to making recruitment decisions based on an issue which has nothing to do with a person's ability to do the job.

Well quite, but why are you shocked? This has been happening to women of child bearing age for what... 40 years?
There was a thread a while ago about women openly rejected for promotion and jobs because they have the potential to get pregnant, and children = maternity leave.

Pronouns = announcement if your belief in a divisive ideology.

Difference is you have the choice not to announce your ideologies.

@LadyDanburysCane

It’s often work policy. My DH has been told he has to include his pronouns on his email signature.

It has been talked about at my work but so far we don’t have to. My signature does have Mrs in it so it’s probably quite obvious that I would use she/her.

I'm not sure that it's a policy that can be enforced though?

Appreciate that people may not want to make a stand, but on the the hand, they could be standing in solidarity with those who are questioning their pronouns/are not ready to announce them or simply just don't want to.

It's a ridiculous policy IMO and people have give lots of reasons why on this thread.

For me if there is a white straight person on a programme, they are almost the ‘minority’.

I was doing a publication a few years back which was to have a photo of school children on the front cover, the brief was that one child must be black of African or Caribbean origin. Instead of asking the local schools for a photo we ended up having to buy in a stock photo so there was a black child in it because the area we were in was all white or Asian children.

I remain shocked at the number of people who are freely admitting to making recruitment decisions based on an issue which has nothing to do with a person's ability to do the job.

I usually have a look at social media for anyone we're considering employing as soon as they get to interview stage and I believe this is standard. It's surprising how often people post nasty, racist or homophobic comments.
It might well be that those people could technically do the job perfectly, but such a person might not be a good fit for the team and may end up being a PR nightmare.
Gender extremism comes into this category too.
Its a red flag that they're someone who may not work effectively or respectfully in a team of diverse people with diverse beliefs.

I work for a large NHS organisation (non clinical), have seen about 4 pronouns on email signatures of colleagues. Not caught on at all and so far no pressure from anyone to include them.

It's a pretty massive and insulting assumption that someone like my non-binary adult child are narcissistic and lacks social skills, just because they have a different view on gender than you do.

It is narcissistic to instruct others how to refer to oneself when they haven't asked. This thread is about putting pronouns in email signatures not asking in a face to face context. It's not their different view on gender, its their view that their gender needs highlighting in all communications.