To not want to say my pronouns

[Bamechage]

Completely happy to get roasted here and for people to tell me I’m wrong but I’m a woman and my name is always mistaken for a man as I shorten it to unisex. I enjoy the ambiguity of it and that in written correspondence people don’t know. Where I work have made it mandatory and I understand it’s to be more inclusive but I liked people not knowing. Have I completely missed the point here and aibu?

Stompy what rights do trans people lack in the UK? And how does compelling the use of pronouns help?

I'm aware that there's a body of mners who'd prefer to silence those of us who support trans rights, but I have as much right to be here as you do.

I have no wish to silence you or anyone else who support trans rights. I would be interested in you explaining what it means to identify as a woman - without referring to sex based gender stereotypes. I’d be interested in hearing how you support trans rights to, for example, access to single sex space, or children being socially transitioned at primary school without their parents knowledge, or the right of a trans woman to compete in women’s sport (beating a woman unconscious in an MMA bout, for example. I’d be interested in hearing how those issues don’t undermine women’s rights/parental rights and responsibilities. I’d be interested in hearing how it’s possible to change your biological sex.

I’d be interested in hearing how compelling people to write their pronouns at the end of an email promotes trans rights?

In my mind it’s forcing me to change my behaviour to support an ideology that I don’t subscribe to - whereby my views and beliefs matter less than those of trans women.

It's similar to the tricky placement problem of placing women who sexually offend against women, though, surely? A group that is very small, but needs careful management to protect the rest of the prison population.

Well no, because if we allow everyone to self-ID using their idiosyncratic definition of gender then we can expect many, many, many more XY humans in a 'women's' prison. Hiding behind 'small numbers' does not address the issue. Neither does is address the way that women feel when they are locked up with an XY human - even if notionally they are 'protected'.

Apart from anything else - why do you think we even need segregation according to identity? Identity is as individual as a people, so it is very hard to group people according to something as nebulous as that. Why do we need sports, prisons - anything - to be segregated according to identity? What would be the rationale for that? If we do segregate according to identity then why are we picking 'gender identity' as a categorisation? Why not pick something more universal? (by which I mean that most people don't have a gender identity).

I have as much right to be here as you do.

Nobody has said you aren't allowed to be here. But "I'm allowed to say it" is a very very poor substitute for an actual argument. Especially coming from someone whose ideology silences women in their spaces, from prisons to competitive sports, except for when it's trying to pressure them to say things in their email footers when they don't want to.

It's similar to the tricky placement problem of placing women who sexually offend against women, though, surely? A group that is very small, but needs careful managent to protect the rest of the prison population.

I think you have misunderstood the relative percentages.

The male prison population is 19 times bigger than the female prison population.

Just the number of men in prison for sex offences is roughly 4 times the size of the entire female prison population.

Only a relatively small number of men need to decide they would prefer a woman’s prison before services are overwhelmed, but self ID gives them that right.

It is dangerous to assume yourself to always be the victim as a member of one oppressed group.

I didn't make that assumption. You don't seem to understand that there could be a conflict of interest between opporessed groups.

I know it is a popular opinion on mn that trans people are somehow trying to harm women

Nearly right. Most trans people aren't trying to harm women but harming women is collateral damage of some of these proposals. You haven't explained how harm to women is to be avoided. Just decided it doesn't matter because trans people are oppressed too, or oppressed more, or something,

Nearly right. Most trans people aren't trying to harm women but harming women is collateral damage of some of these proposals.

Well said. It seems that many of the trans lobby 1. don't understand why women need to defend their hard-won sex-based rights, 2. don't really care whether women's rights are upheld or not 3. think their own self-assumed 'right' to do whatever they like (and male privilege) is more important than whether this tramples on women's rights.

It's similar to the tricky placement problem of placing women who sexually offend against women, though, surely? A group that is very small, but needs careful managent to protect the rest of the prison population

I am sure that this can be managed just as it is in the male estate with male sex offenders who sexually offend against other males

I am sure that this can be managed just as it is in the male estate with male sex offenders who sexually offend against other males.

Why should it have to be? Why must women be locked up with dangerous males at all? To whose benefit, for what reason, and to whose cost?

Why not just make prisons completely unisex if sex segregation can be overridden by anyone with a penis claiming they feel female?

I was referencing female sex offenders who are housed in the female estate not male sex offenders who should be in the male prison estate.

This is absolutely not okay. If you are guilted into complying with this ridiculous policy, put in "he/him". If anyone queries you about it, tell them you'll be reporting them to HR and contacting your lawyers.

@SnackQueen

This is absolutely not okay. If you are guilted into complying with this ridiculous policy, put in "he/him". If anyone queries you about it, tell them you'll be reporting them to HR and contacting your lawyers.

People will take that to mean OP is either male (she says her name is unisex as she uses it) or a transman.

Duh that’s the point.

@SnackQueen

Duh that’s the point.

What are you talking about? It's not the point at all. It won't come across as an act of defiance, it'll just look like OP is buying into the system. If anything it'll help validate it by suggesting OP is using it to assert herself as trans or NB when she isn't.

I think SnackQueen is suggesting taking the piss out of an illogical, damaging system.

Personally though I'd rather challenge it on legal grounds: privacy and sexism.

My point is that it won't be seen that way. It'll be seen as OP asserting a masculine gender identity.

Why would the person sending you emails need to know your pronouns? Are they going to address the emails, Dear Her? Or maybe if referring to your emails when talking to someone else they'll want to say, "Her email stated". Very useful.