Dear Sirs

[Suzanne12]

Is this an acceptable way to start an email that will be received by either a man or a woman? Would you say something if a colleague used this term to send an email to a generic inbox?

Yabu - it's fine
Yanbu - it's not acceptable anymore

@SignOnTheWindow you're right, it's from Invisible Women!

A pp said they can't accept there is anything wrong with default male thinking - read that book and she covers many examples and studies of how default male thinking has negatively affected women through them not being considered in important decision making.

I wonder if this archaic form persists more in insular organisations - most law firms will be dealing with matters internal to the U.K. I'd guess. I can't begin to imagine anyone in my company (global, science domain) using it.

I would still use the terms Dear Sir or Madam in a formal letter/email. It may be classed as archaic by some people these days, but it is a traditional way of address,and sad that some people wan't to do away with this. Bringing the term sexism into everything now, is really quite ridiculous.

You've rather missed the point, I think.

It's 'Dear Sirs' being used regardless of the sex of the recipient that's the issue. Not 'Dear Sir or Madam', which actually acknowledges that a woman might read the correspondence. Very different connotations. No one is saying 'Dear Sir or Madam' in formal correspondence is sexist or inappropriate.

Raising institutional sexism as an issue isn't 'ridiculous' either.

Bringing the term sexism into everything now, is really quite ridiculous.

Institutions still being sexist in the 21st century is what's ridiculous.

Right out with the ark - if it was even ever on it. SIr/Madam shouldn't be used either (not for sexist reasons, just people respond better to correspondence that doesn't open with a obvious generic address.)

Though if it were me @Suzanne12 , I'd respond by addressing my emails to him 'Dear Madam' because I'm a pain in the arse. Had someone have a big whiny moan on email in work because humankind was used instead in place of mankind on a internal newsletter - he went on and on about how it doesn't matter that it had the word man as women know it included them, and no need to be so sensitive, something about snowflakes, and it only being a word. So I changed it to womankind and sent it to him. Maw ha ha.

(Officially it remained as humankind)

HRTFT
In email which is less prescriptive;
Dear Customer Services,
Dear Sky TV,
FAO Head of Accounts Payable,
Dear Council Planning,

Etc. Unless you have a name.

In the olden days when I was working in offices, the standard greeting if you didn't know who the recipient was, was 'Dear Sir or Madam'.

Errol I'd say that's true that it persists in more insular organisations.

IMO it's definitely endemic in older, smaller firms (I think a PP has said the same) which tend to be more insular and 'old school'. It's also used more in litigation. It's a bit like excessive legalese. People do it because 'that's what lawyers are expected to sound like'.

Bigger firms (IME) tend to prefer a more plain English approach, at least on the non-contentious matters. When you're working on a multi-million pound tech deal, the client doesn't have time to sit and interpret what you're saying. They just want to know what the risk is and what you think they should do to avoid it. Likewise, if you're negotiating with the other side (whether or not they are based in the UK) for the most part you both want it to be as painless as possible, so simplicity is key. Using unnecessarily long words and formalities like 'Dear Sirs' normally (though not always) suggests you're in for a bit more of a fight because it immediately puts barriers up.

Litigious correspondence on the other hand is generally more prone to verbosity, pomp, and bluster (sometimes it's tactical, sometimes it's just stylistic and has been passed down through generations of lawyers). You're more likely to see 'Dear Sirs' from a litigator I think. It adds that extra layer of gravitas (in theory) which most non-litigious correspondence really doesn't merit. I don't like the phrase at all, but I am a bit more forgiving with its use in that context. I don't think it's right and I'm glad firms are moving away from it, but I think it'll take longer for it to go away simply because it's still so ingrained and some trainees are still being taught to use it by people (mostly men) that started practising decades ago when it was a market expectation, because heaven forbid there be a female partner.

Using it outside of the legal market, especially in this day and age, just seems absolutely bizarre to me.

Totally unacceptable whether in the legal profession or not. Certainly should not be used in emails.

So, I had a look through the inbox and found older emails also using "Dear Sirs" so it's not just this one person. I've highlighted it to the CEO who came back to me straight away agreeing that it wasn't how we do things. It's been passed to someone else who is looking into sending out some guidance to all employees on the accepted house style. However, I've found the house style guidance document on the intranet and it does list "Dear Sirs" as a way to address multiple recipients. It is a 2019 version so not outdated.

I've got it! "Per" —short for Person.

At least you've found it and flagged it Op. Its ridiculous that it was still included in 2019, but hopefully that will be the last time. Glad the CEO agrees with you.

An interesting article from 2016 about a law firm banning ‘Dear Sirs’.

Personally I hate it and I’ve called it out in previous jobs.

With regards to writing to a firm in an official capacity you can use the firm name - eg Dear Stuffy Lawyers LLP, Dear Dinosaur Ltd or To the Directors of Dinosaur Ltd.

The next step is to stop using Dear Sir/Madam!! It’s only marginally better imo.

Dear Purchasing, Dear Sales Team, Dear Accounts etc etc much better.

Using Dear sirs on an internal communication is bizarre.

I've just looked through a few of my company's internal emails to multiple recipients. There are lots of good options.

From the head honcho, re CV19:
Dear colleagues and friends

From management:
Dear Team
Dear
Dear All
Dear Colleagues

Less formal communications :
Hi all
Team

I think 'Dear Sirs' sounds dated and lazy - as though you don't know who you are talking to, even though you must be using a specific email address.

It's so very old fashioned and the fact that it is still used in legal circles says it all. Would men ignore it if they were addressed Dear Madams? I think not.

On an internal email it seems bizarre. At bit too formal but maybe it's out of habit rather than a Hi Team

the fact that it is still used in legal circles says it all. Would men ignore it if they were addressed Dear Madams? I think not

Legally it's used to address the entity that is the company ie Bloggs Ltd, Bloggs Ltd is neither male or female, regardless of who Bloggs Ltd employs.
Dear Madams would not be right either.
Dear Bloggs Ltd, just seems like spam.
Dear It ???

But no as a letter written to the company I doubt anybody would ignore it regardless of how it's addressed.

The reason letters are written to the company rather than individuals is people leave, move, switch roles and sometimes it's more appropriate for someone else to respond rather than the FAO person.

It would really annoy me.

@Musmerian it’s use in the legal profession has become 100% gender neutral. It’s purely a convention and it’s widely accepted that women are included within sirs rather than excluded. It’s similar to the word guys. May have once been used as gender specific but not now.

Not the point of the thread but just need to satisfy my inner pedant by pointing out that the plural of “Madam” is “Mesdames”, so rather than writing “Dear Madams” it should be “Dear Mesdames”.

I find this interesting on a professional level. I translate Italian to English and struggle with this type of gendered legal speak. Paradoxically in Italy this is seen as a bit of a non question. When every word is gendered, including tables and sinks, words like 'uomo' for "human being' are deeply ingrained still. I wonder whether this will ever move in gendered languages, it seems impossible to neutralise all the words!!

Very outdated. As is "to whom it may concern". Awful.

It is utterly inappropriate. Years ago I used to bin letters addressed to Dear Sirs on the basis that they clearly didn’t want my help. (I realise now this was possibly an over-reaction ). I like the person who suggested Dear Madam / Sir upthread. Might start using that!

it’s use in the legal profession has become 100% gender neutral. It’s purely a convention and it’s widely accepted that women are included within sirs rather than excluded. It’s similar to the word guys. May have once been used as gender specific but not now.

I always ask people not to include me in "guys" i am not a man. I also refuse to be included in 'sirs'. I'm not a man. And as several PP have mentioned the default male malarkey that society adopts has been shown to have fatal consequences for women (in terms of pharmaceuticals and car safety to name two).

I don't like "dear all" in an email with more than 3 recipients (up to 3 I'll often name them all which is cumbersome but, hey ho.) I always think that it defaults in the recipients' minds to "oh great! someone else will do it".

If we accept "dear sirs" is historically accurate in business writing (because "girls" can't do business, amirite?) then we should probably start addressing coders and programmers as "dear ladies" because historically (probably due to using keyboards and the tediousness of sorting out reams of paper/punched cards) programming (computation) was a woman's job. It is as ridiculous as assuming that all nurses are women.

Amazing that they have easily adapted to email over the years but not non sexist forms of address.