to not want to sign off my emails with preferred pronouns?

[AlphaBites]

We've had an email do the rounds today at work saying in the next few weeks all staff are expected to sign off with their preferred pronouns, to save any embarrassment for any staff.

I don't want to.

Can I fight this somehow?

Opportunity fine - optional

Necessity no

It should be optional

Thats it

The end

decomposing wants to sign off and be referred to in a certain way in correspondence...I don’t

Its dead easy...just make it optional

So when I sign off as Rufus thereindeer i am happy to be addressed as rufus or rufus thereindeer

If i wanted to be referred to as ms thereindeer i would sign off as ms the reindeer

Or we could go all continental and i would be M. The reindeer

There is absolutely no need to FORCE me to sign off a certain way

If i minded what pronouns someone used for me i would pop my pronouns on...but i dont so I shan’t

Composing you seem to confuse titles being used as conferring automatic respect and seniority. With respect, that is bollocks. Pupils won't see a teacher as a peer just because they use their first name.

Ok. My experience tells me differently. And it's a bit of an oxymoron to say "with respect" followed by "bollocks" surely? What is wrong with respectfully having a difference of opinion?

This has been the norm for many schools for decades. Quaker schools, such as Leighton Park, for example. They certainly don’t seem to have any problems.

But that has a different demographic to say a challenging comprehensive in East London.

Decomposing do you think title or pronoun on an email signature should be optional or a directive?

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer

I agree.

I don't think anyone should assume. So, I don't want people to assume that they can call me by my first name. Equally I don't think people should assume he or she. Let people indicate how they want to be addressed or referred to and I agree, I don't think anyone should be made to state preferred pronouns.

@DecomposingComposers - Ok. My experience tells me differently.

Have you worked in a school where first names is the norm? I think that students in a school where titles are the norm may use first names to indicate disrespect. However, in a school where first names are the norm, it's just the normal form of address, so neither respectful nor disrespectful in itself.

Decomposing do you think title or pronoun on an email signature should be optional or a directive?

I think they should be optional. Equally, if you opt to not say then I don't think you should complain if people address you in a firm that you don't like.

I do think there needs to be a standard way to make the initial approach though and then it's up to the individual to invite a more informal address.

The accepted way of addressing someone here has always been to use an honorific and I don't want random people just assuming they can address me by my first name unless I state that it is ok.

So companies who contact me should address me as Mrs Composers not Dear Decomposing.

But how do you know what they prefer, unless they say? Which is presumably what this is about? Giving people the opportunity to express how they want to be referred to?

If you feel strongly about which pronouns are used then no problem list your pronoun, I will use it.

The thread is about making me list mine. I don't care what pronoun people use for me and do not wish to attract bias by signifying my sex.

Read the whole thread in horror.
The absolute bollocks of calling someone a cunt and threatening to doxx them because they hold perfectly valid views about biology and the way women are discriminated in the workplace has just completely finished me. This is why we have to fight this. This is not about 'politeness' this is about controlling women.
On the subject of doxxing - come at me - come on - you cowards.
Back to the subject - I thought of something else. How long before we are compelled to put our pronouns on our CVs?
I credit getting quite a lot of interviews on the fact that my name is traditionally used for men. I am in favour of removing anything that indicates sex from CVs - a bit like how orchestras started auditioning musicians from behind a screen and suddenly started employing more women.

Well. Didn't take long for this thread to turn sinister - and I don't think sinister is too strong a word. I hope it stands testimony to the the strategies used to close down debate and silence women who dare, even moderately, to assert their own rights and preference against people who are not backwards in coming forwards and asserting theirs. Threats to dox: threats to out them as 'transphobes' to their employers in an attempt to destroy their careers. Sinister, but run-of-the-mill, familiar TRA rhetoric.

It's in the light of behaviour like this that I saw a lesbian recently state that she felt thoroughly let down by Stonewall, and say that these days she'd feel safer at a BNP rally than Pride, because at least the far right know what a lesbian is. It's a sobering thought. Because the Left is traditionally the ground on which minority rights are fought, the betrayal appears even worse when it's emanating from that direction.

The posts made by this 'midwife' are an absolutely perfect example of the reasons why women should be concerned about these assaults on their rights, autonomy and freedom of expression.

Sinister.

@DecomposingComposers Surely like most people, people email back using the language you have used in your email? So if someone emails me and signs off Mrs Manara, I email back saying Mrs Manara. If they email me saying Jenny Manara, I email back saying Dear Jenny Manara. Those who like less formal approaches after a few emails usually start signing emails as just Jenny, so I email back saying Jenny.
That is very basic work etiquette and should be basic stuff for most people.
I also wonder why people care what pronouns someone uses when they are not there? If I refer to Jenny as she emailed and said.... and Kevin and said he emailed and said.... Why would you care?
Although I know why you some would care. I suspect this is about trans people who are so super special that they can not just change their name to a traditional female or male one and want to insist on being called Kevin but addressed as she/her. Or those who use zie as pronouns, a word that most people have never heard of. The truth is this not about your ordinary trans person.

@Siameasy I agree. Which is why this will never catch on. I was thinking of some of the men I have worked with too who would just refuse to do it. Sadly women tend to be more compliant.

Decomposing I doubt people would get my pronoun wrong given my first name but no I won’t complain if they do

Your other point is off topic but I personally prefer not to be Mrs and for companies to use my first or full name

Decomposing, I take the bollocks back and say I disagree instead. It was a figure I speech and not intended to offend. Apologies.

@MsMcWibble I can imagine putting your pronouns on your cv would be welcomed at a few woke places. But I suspect at most workplaces this would either be something incomprehensible to them - a wtf is that about, or just be a red flag to them and they would assume that you will be a troublemaker.
It will never be common.
I really think any woke people reading this thread need to get out and actual talk to ordinary people. Most of you are woefully out of touch with the average person. Most people know about trans women or trans men i.e. the born in the wrong body narrative you see on TV. They assume everyone has had or planning to have genital surgery. And that they will take a female or male name as appropriate. Amongst the general public this is still a challenge for many to accept. The other stuff such as cis, gender fluid, personal pronouns of zie etc, they will not have heard of and will care even less about.

Your other point is off topic but I personally prefer not to be Mrs and for companies to use my first or full name.

I'm married. I retained the liberty of keeping my original name. I now use the non-gendered 'Dr' by default - a thing I never intended to do as I thought it pretentious for a non-medical doctor - but a convenient side-step from that perpetually annoying question: 'is that Miss or Mrs?' Nowadays I prefer Dr. Ms is fine. I don't particularly object to 'Miss', but don't particularly like it; but I truly bridle at 'Mrs'.

I've no wish to hide the fact that I'm married. I wear my wedding ring with pride. But I'm not an adjunct to someone else's identity, expect to receive the courtesy of my own name, and have never been 'Mrs' anyone. Nor have I ever been married to my father

Companies wishing to address people formally can by all means use Dear Sir/Madam or Dear Sir/Madam/Insert non-binary definition of choice.

Splitting hairs over largely obsolete titles isn't the same conversation as being required to declare your preferred pronouns (not least expect everyone to remember these as well as your name) in every working context. The next thing will be tribunals against those who inadvertently use the undesired pronouns, having already been told what the desired ones are. Oh wait ...

And anyone who works with people in a variety of foreign countries is used to personal pronouns being wrong. I am and I really don't care. I have a name that is clearly female but that most of the people in other countries I work in have never heard so don't know if I am female or male or how to pronounce my name.
But then I am secure and have no personal hang ups around this. So I don't need everyone else always to get my personal pronouns right so that they bolster up my sense of self and dampen down my own insecurity.

Nb: Dear (forename) (surname) is also a perfectly acceptable form of formal address.

jennymanara

I agree after the initial form of contact has been made you can get an idea of how people would like to be addressed by the way that they sign off but I am talking about initial contact being made with me. I don't like companies or medical professionals assuming that they can call me by my first name. If I invite it, fine, but they shouldn't assume it.

I expect the formality of title surname, which is how it has been for many, many years.

"You do want to be polite, don't you?"

Women are constantly being policed about their politeness. So, no.

But how do they get your name in the first place? In my case it would be in my company website, or through switchboard or a business card. In those cases I just have on the website and business card how I want to be addressed, and if I cared I would make sure the list of employees the switchboard has has the same. If you care about these things it is not usually difficult to sort out.

jennymanara

It depends how they get your name in the first place though surely? And in many cases (if not all) when I register with a company, or at the drs or the hospital, the firm asks for my title first name surname.

Very few places use it though. Most just use first name surname. Many just first name. So how do you indicate that you want title surname used, when you have actually listed it?

When I get hospital letters sent, or at my GPS, the drs are listed or referred to as Dr first name surname, but when I address them or refer to them I say Dr Surname. Would never cross my mind to say "Julia" or "Mike" even though I know those are their names.

Maybe just try it composing?

Isn't this pronoun thing a problem for trans people who haven't come out yet? Doesn't it make them more dysphoric if they have to use the pronouns of their own actual sex if they haven't declared their gender identity yet?