Pronouns - Can someone remind me why we are against this in emails

[landantan]

Hi

Can someone remind me why some people (likely myself included) does not agree with stated pronouns in email signatures?

It is being requested at work from the perspective of being a small step to being an ally to LGBTQ+ community.

I just think it is a bit pointless and whilst I have nothing against this or any other community I cannot see what knowing or sharing pronouns really does apart from make you look like a bit of a tit.

Can someone offer a more articulate explanation please?

No, it isnt. You are being deliberately obtuse. And if you're not, it's far too much work if I have to make the same point for times and you are still arguing kt.

It's very, very simple.

I dont think what women do is as bad as rape and death, but in the conversation of causing the problem to go on and on, they're equal.

Whether you think I did or didnt sa that a few pages ago is irrelevant. We arent in court.

Eh? What do Labour have to do with it?!

@AlisonDonut so if theres no middle ground, whats the solution? refuse to budge in a childish game of he started it under the delusion you have a chance of winning this?

Of course I can't do better. If I could, I'd be on the big bucks.

Valid women is a ridiculous expression. What's the opposite? An invalid woman?Which is a what? And how does one "earn" their ronouns?

I've just realised i gave you a very short sentence in retaliation to your reply and i apologise for that - we had the police round for door to door and I got distracted and forgot to come back to you.

I'd like to see a feminist backing the safe spaces, prison etc, rape counsellors (Believe it or not, I was HORRIFIED to hear about that) and speaking up for women without calling trans an ideology or hurting peoples' feelings. Why so difficult?

@FlirtsWithRhinos or, conversely, a trans person who will stand u for womans' rights.

But neither of these things will happen for as long as the"she started it" continues, and it's women who will cop for it, and genuine trans people, which is a shame.

Valid women is a ridiculous expression. What's the opposite? An invalid woman?Which is a what? And how does one "earn" their ronouns?

In this instance I think valid means real. And I think that in order to be a valid, or real, woman, you need to be an adult human of the female biological sex. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pronouns don't change reality.

I'd like to see a feminist backing the safe spaces, prison etc, rape counsellors (Believe it or not, I was HORRIFIED to hear about that) and speaking up for women without calling trans an ideology or hurting peoples' feelings. Why so difficult?

An ideology is essentially a belief system.

How is the belief that "woman" is an identity, or an indefinable feeling that some people have, NOT an ideology?

I don't think we can avoid hurting people's feelings if stating a few facts about biological reality hurts people's feelings.

Valid doesn't mean real.
Valid means accepted.

You have proved why this will never be solved. You don't care that you're hurting people with your views, you're invalidating their identity, you're dismissing their voices, shutting them down and then seem mightily surprised when people don't want to listen to you.

Valid doesn't mean real.
Valid means accepted.
You have proved why this will never be solved. You don't care that you're hurting people with your views, you're invalidating their identity, you're dismissing their voices, shutting them down and then seem mightily surprised when people don't want to listen to you.

Well no. I can't accept male people as women, because in order to do so you have to change the definition of what a woman is.

If you redefine a woman as someone with a particular identity, I am excluded from that definition.

To put it another way, if accepting trans women as women means we have to accept that all women are redefined, and that we no longer have a word for "adult humans of the female biological sex", I absolutely don't see why we should be under any obligation to do that.

And maybe it really is just as simple as "you can't always have what you want", particularly if you are a male person who wants to be a woman.

What about a woman that wants to be a man? By your logic, she's still a woman, so does your feminism extend to her?

I notice you completely ignored my post about hurting peoples' feelings.

There's a thread running about Maya Forstater, who has had a payout for being an arsehole to other people.

I'd rather live in a cardboard box on the street than be in that camp.

But not everybody is asking you to do that, tho. its not black and white. can you really not get that?

You don't care that you're hurting people with your views, you're invalidating their identity, you're dismissing their voices, shutting them down and then seem mightily surprised when people don't want to listen to you.

Males getting hurty feelings always does seem to result in death and rape threats towards women...weird huh. Almost like they keep their male pattern violent behaviour.

@beautyisthefaceisee If it makes me a bigot, so be it. Your opinion of me is as irrelevant as the man pretending to be a woman.

a - she wasn't an arsehole, she merely left a leaflet on her desk, relating to a government consultation.
b - No decision has been made on a payout. If she lost her job for a leaflet then that is discrimination, and she deserves a payout [that's how discrimination tribunals work].

The facts are all there, you might want to read up on them. Before spouting 'nonsense on stilts'.

Well yes, that person also cannot have what they want, which is to change sex. Something which is not scientifically possible and never will be.

I take reasonable care not to deliberately hurt people's feelings, but not to the point of lying or denying material reality. If reality hurts people's feelings, then there comes a point where I think we can reasonably consider that that is a "them problem" and we are not obliged to accommodate it.

Of course my feminism includes trans men and female non binary people. It includes all female people, and not male people. But feminism isn't about telling people what they want to hear. It's not about being kind or nice. It's about fighting for equal rights for female people, and an end to sex based oppression. Perhaps if we can accomplish that, fewer people will want to opt out of being female.

Maya Forstater has had a payout for being unlawfully discriminated against for her beliefs, which are considered "worthy of respect in a democratic society". Amazing that her "belief" that humans can't change sex, which is less of a belief than a statement of obvious and irrefutable fact, even needs to be defended in a court of law.

It is black and white though.

Either trans women are women or they aren't. They aren't.

Either trans men are men or they aren't. They aren't.

Either being a woman is a feeling in someone's head or it is a biological reality. It is a biological reality.

DO you have a MN textbook? "hurty feelings" indeed. And they say misandry doesn't exist on MN.

Btw - you cant have it both ways. according to you, transmen are women. So do you not care about their feelings? Or do you lose your MN feminism badge if you make choices others dont like?

Transphobic to boot. you're lovely.

It's more to do with the fact that she is in a professional environment.

The verdict is actually a loss for women.

How long until a man "states" truth, loses his job and wins? they've shot themselves in the foot.

a) you really are naive
b) she'll get a payout, cause people like her always do.

I've no idea what you're on about re stilts.

Btw - you cant have it both ways. according to you, transmen are women. So do you not care about their feelings? Or do you lose your MN feminism badge if you make choices others dont like?

This is such an odd take.

This isn't about feelings.

Yeah, people who deliver "diversity training" in which they mislabel people "cis" and use nonsense phrases such as "assigned at birth" and claim that everyone has a gender identity are also in a professional environment.

Why are they allowed - even encouraged and invited - to express their personal beliefs in a work environment and present them as facts, but Maya isn't allowed to express hers in a professional environment?

If you want people to keep their beliefs about sex and gender out of the professional working environment then that needs to apply to both sides, and I think gender critical feminists would be absolutely delighted with that outcome. Everyone can just bring their work selves to work and leave their gender identities at home.

This verdict is a victory for common sense, and for women who shouldn't be victimised for disagreeing with gender ideology. Yes I know you don't like that word, but I really don't know what else to call it. It is a belief system, for which there is basically no evidence.

Men state the truth all the time and aren't victimised for it.

People persecuted for having gender critical beliefs, and losing their livelihood over it, are almost all female. Maybe you should have a long hard think about why that is.

a) you really are naive
b) she'll get a payout, cause people like her always do.

I've no idea what you're on about re stilts.

Evidently you know nothing about this case as that's all she did. And again, you know nothing about this case as if you did you'd know about 'nonsense on stilts'. And nothing has been decided about payouts, I agree she is likely to do so but you don't make the rules, the tribunal does and unlike you, I stick to actual reality. And no judgement on awards has been made yet.

Perhaps instead of having a complete public meltdown, go do some research if you want to know, or just go have that little lie down. Nobody should lose their job for a leaflet. On whichever side you are. It is utterly ridiculous.

Oh, is it not? Explain to me why you don't want males in shared spaces and counselling groups and prisons.