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.

The ridiculous thing is that to show inclusivity we have to point out differences.

And generally, the inclusivity excludes women or at least shoves them well down the pecking order of importance.

I’m all for live and let live but that has to work both ways. Don’t ask me to be any less important than I am and don’t re-label me because you want to claim my status for your own. Especially if it is as and when you feel like it.

Why would I add personal data about myself that according to GDPR no company has the right to ask and especially not ask me to broadcast it to the world in emails I send when working for them?
Can you imagine if I leave the company and I exercise my right to be forgotten? Are they going to retract all the emails I sent on their behalf?

The question wasn't about being forced to show your pronouns.

It was about judging people who do, presumably the freedom to leap to judgment being based on believing people who show their pronouns are doing so voluntarily.

Would I judge people who put their pronouns in their email signature? Yes and not favourably. It signals to me they are either sheep who will follow or high maintenance and easy to take offence. Neither traits will endear them to me.

@sanluca

Would I judge people who put their pronouns in their email signature? Yes and not favourably. It signals to me they are either sheep who will follow or high maintenance and easy to take offence. Neither traits will endear them to me.

Why would you think either of those things?

[quote bluebluezoo]@TiredOfTelford If i am asked my pronouns I am prepared to say that as I have no internal feelings about which gender I am- I don’t “feel” like a woman or a man, I am therefore gender free.

Debating on whether to insist pronouns aren’t used at all, and I don’t want my gender, or lack of, referred to at all....[/quote]
If it ever does get to the point where I have no choice about giving pronouns I am absolutely adopting traditionally male ones, with the explanation that if pronoun gender is a personal choice I will have the ones with the power thank you.

@sanluca

Would I judge people who put their pronouns in their email signature? Yes and not favourably. It signals to me they are either sheep who will follow or high maintenance and easy to take offence. Neither traits will endear them to me.

And refusing to put them on when your manager states that it’s a company wide instruction doesn’t exactly endear someone to their employer! It honestly isn’t always a choice.

So far my DH hasn’t done it but he will do it if he is told it will become a disciplinary matter because he will want to keep his job.

If it ever does get to the point where I have no choice about giving pronouns I am absolutely adopting traditionally male ones, with the explanation that if pronoun gender is a personal choice I will have the ones with the power thank you

Hasn’t it been demonstrated quite clearly that if someone assumes you’re male in an email- a neutral or male associated name, the responses are completely different than if the sender uses a female name or title...

Glow Up, the makeup artist reality show have started doing this this season. Seems so unnecessary to me. The audience aren't going to be talking to the participants!
Also it seems there is actually only one who goes by They/Them. Why do they then all need to put their pronouns in?
Same with the email, if you have a different pronouns to what is to be expected, by all means pit it in, otherwise whats the point?

No surprise there

Yes. Fortunately not had it in any emails yet, but any linked in requests get cheerfully deleted.

Why would you think either of those things?

Because they are either doing it to feel good about themselves or they feel special and want others too make them feel special too. Which means I am supporting a meaningless action that actually won't help any minority group or I am being involved in someone strangers 's mental health problems. Neither feels good to me.

I will support real meaningful action, like treating people with respect regardless of race, age, sex, religion or who their partner is. I will help that single mum who needs a break or that person who has been unemployed fo years and just wants to work and so on.

Yes, I judge people who put pronouns in their signature.

I can't explain why without breaking MN guidelines.

@sanluca

Why would you think either of those things?

Because they are either doing it to feel good about themselves or they feel special and want others too make them feel special too. Which means I am supporting a meaningless action that actually won't help any minority group or I am being involved in someone strangers 's mental health problems. Neither feels good to me.

I will support real meaningful action, like treating people with respect regardless of race, age, sex, religion or who their partner is. I will help that single mum who needs a break or that person who has been unemployed fo years and just wants to work and so on.

You seem to know a lot about people's motivations. .

Because they are either doing it to feel good about themselves or they feel special and want others too make them feel special too.

Or because they’ve been told they have to as it is company policy.....

I am absolutely adopting traditionally male ones, with the explanation that if pronoun gender is a personal choice I will have the ones with the power thank you

Mic drop

It is not legal for employers to have a company policy that obliges employees to publish their gender at the bottom of every email they send. It is personal information and everyone has a human right to privacy. It would also be discriminatory against transgender people to force them to choose a pronoun when they may not be ready to make that decision or want to publicise that they are trans to everyone they send an email to.

I mean, if trans people are experiencing discrimination at work, and it's likely that some will be, how is it at all helpful to draw attention to their trans status in a professional communication?

Or because they’ve been told they have to as it is company policy.....

True, but the signals I get is 'avoid avoid'. Too much drama, too much 'me me me'.

Just like certain people who see single sex rights for adult human females as anti-trans, I see pronoun declaration as sexist and anti-feminism. Women will never have a chance at equality if we are made to kepp having to remind people we are female.

@sanluca

Or because they’ve been told they have to as it is company policy.....

True, but the signals I get is 'avoid avoid'. Too much drama, too much 'me me me'.

Just like certain people who see single sex rights for adult human females as anti-trans, I see pronoun declaration as sexist and anti-feminism. Women will never have a chance at equality if we are made to kepp having to remind people we are female.

Do you think black rights were advanced by people who were silent on their ethnicity?

Or that LGBT rights were advanced by people staying in the closet?

darker not sure that’s a good analogy. I’m not aware of any policy on behalf of gay rights which requires us all to publicly announce our sexuality. I’m also not aware of any black rights movement which demanded a right to call themselves white and at the same time require all to announce their ethnicity publicly in emails - nor to require white emailers to announce themselves as ‘cis white’ or some other imposed label to differentiate them from the newly trans white posters.

*Do you think black rights were advanced by people who were silent on their ethnicity?

Or that LGBT rights were advanced by people staying in the closet?*

Worked out well in Germany when people were forced to announce their ethnicity...or sexuality for that matter.

The point is if you want to announce in every email you are black/jewish/gay/catholic/pakistani/mexican or whatever then thats absolutely fine. You should be able to do so without fear of discrimination or judgement.

But being forced to do it, well that’s a whole other issue. People may have reasons for not telling the world their personal business, and they should also have the right to not announce it.

Yes

You are right to say people shouldn't be forced but that isn't what we are talking about. The thread is about judging people who choose to show their pronouns.

I was reminded of this thread yesterday - I received a work email from someone who put their pronouns as she/they. Surely that doesn’t even make any sense? Either they should be she/her or they/their??

Maybe they are saying that either is ok with them? I’m not an expert though!