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?

So can I assume Katie Hopkins will be the next to be in the guardian with her payouts then? A lot of the things she says are based on fact.

Frankie Boyle will now avoid all criticism because his jokes are factual?

A pupil, years ago now, threatened to violate me in the worst way possible. The outcome was that it wasn't sexual violence because he "didn't actually do it" and he "didn't mean it". Back in my class the next day.

Cause truth is better than feelings, yeah?

It is possible however for that approach to be misused

But as a general question if one party feels something is transphobic and the other feels that misogyny was expressed do you record both equally ?

In schools, if a pupil tells me they feel a comment was racist, it's logged as a racist incident.

And when investigated and found to be not even remotely racist, then it will be dropped.

Your relationship with factual discussion is something else 😆

So I can call MN women a ciswoman day and night then, desite the fact they've told me they find it offensive - because it's an accepted term in my workplace that we have been told to use to refer to women as (it hasn't come up yet, because I don't work 'with' adults).

Oh, it wouldnt be OK?

Thought it was down to the person doing the feeling?

So I can call MN women a ciswoman day and night then, desite the fact they've told me they find it offensive - because it's an accepted term in my workplace that we have been told to use to refer to women as (it hasn't come up yet, because I don't work 'with' adults).

You can tweet that as much as you like and it won't affect your employment, no.

Ciswomen wouldn't.

My political belief would, my registration would be affected.

Make of that what you will.

I had a pal a few years ago who was photographed in the same photo as a box which said Neil Lennon on it (not long after the letter box bomb threat).

Thrown out of university for bringing it into disrepute.

If I went on a night out and made a scene and was reported, I'd be up in front of the GTCS for disrepute. So yes, I would.

It used to be that racism, sexism, homophobia was judged in a court of law on what the person at the receiving end felt it was

was it? When?

Can I ask a serious question?

What was achieved by the Maya verdict?

That 'women wont be silenced and can say that trans is an ideology?'

We will see in 5 years where the "you can say what you want and wont lose your job" gets us.

Certainly not a society I want to be in.

My parent was a policeman. We were brought up regularly reminded of incidents of that , where "I didnt mean x" meant nada.

I mean, I could be totally making it up for shits and giggles, but thats what we were always told. Presumably they had seen enough that made them feel strongly about that.

We've digressed. My point is, a world where people can be hurtful and offensive to others, why is that to be celebrated? I dont care if you agree with her, her view hurts people.

Jesy Nelson was bigger than the other girls. Katie Hopkins was factually correct. didn't hurt her any less. Why would we celebrate that?

If I went on a night out and made a scene and was reported, I'd be up in front of the GTCS for disrepute. So yes, I would.

Are you not capable of making like for like comparisons? The case in question is about tweeting beliefs. You can tweet that MN is full of ciswomen til the cows come home, you won't get any penalties of any description for that.

What was achieved by the Maya verdict?

People can state scientific facts without fear of losing their jobs because of ideologues. I expect in time you'll get why that's important. Do call back when the realisation dawns.

What was achieved by the Maya verdict?

that women cannot be discriminated against in the workplace merely because they hold an opinion about the role sex plays in their oppression.

Her case was fact specific. This decision doesn’t set any precedent - had she been found to have acted in a transphobic way, she would have lost, but the principle from the last hearing, that gender critical beliefs are protected, will protect the huge number of women that don’t want sex erased in favour of gender.

it doesn’t mean anyone can say what they want and get away with it. it literally doesn’t mean that at all

I thought it was about "Leaving a leaflet on a desk".

My point is, you have to behave professionally, regardless of what you think behind closed doors. She didn't.

I cant make like for like, because I dont think trans is an ideology. So I wouldn't say anything as bloody stupid as that in the first place, but my point was , we all have to watch how we behave in relation to our beliefs.

And its not a like for like comparison. You might find it offensive on MN but its a term agreed by policy and I could say it daily in work without any come back. The fact you think the two compare shows how far this has gone.

Well, not really. and it's an ideology, in your opinion.

Maya might like to think she's leading the revolution but it won't happen by practice. If anything, she's shot her own employment

I expect in time you'l see that this was a big mistake, when men can say what they like to women in the workplace because its a "scientific fact".

I'll stand at a funeral at the weekend and when they say about someone going to heaven il say "no she isn't, thats an ideology and heavens not real". that will be OK, wont it?

What about men? or do we only care about women?

It's hard to find her transphobic when as you point out we protect GC beliefs, a great deal of which are transphobic!

It does though, and it will. Anyone who thinks this will remain a stand alone.....fair play. But its a sad day.

Well, not really. and it's an ideology, in your opinion.

What do you think an ideology is, and why do you think the belief that we have sexed souls and that this is more important than physical sex is not one?

Heading out for the evening (for the inevitable post dinner discussion where I@ll be accused of ignoring questions).

I know we don't agree ladies, but i do appreciate the discussion. I agree on nothing, but it's things to think about. Thanks.

I expect in time you'l see that this was a big mistake, when men can say what they like to women in the workplace because its a "scientific fact".

They already do

I'll stand at a funeral at the weekend and when they say about someone going to heaven il say "no she isn't, thats an ideology and heavens not real". that will be OK, wont it?

Well you're not going to lose your job over it, no.

My point is, you have to behave professionally, regardless of what you think behind closed doors. She didn't.

Whats unprofessional about stating basic scientific facts?

She hasn't profited from it, she lost employment as a direct result of stating her entirely reasonable views.

It’s so much more nuanced and complicated than this.

Discrimination law has never been totally about perception. It’s not irrelevant - even aspect of the test for harassment is the effect it has on the complainant - but generally the reason for the treatment is what’s important.

“I didn’t mean x” - agreed, but you can see a situation where something isn’t intended to be racist but somebody eg acts out of either ignorance or subconscious bias. It’s racist, notwithstanding it wasn’t intentional. There are also cases where someone thinks something is racist but in fact the actions of the person doing the act was not tainted by racism at all. See David Lammy and the papal smoke.

Can you see that calling women cis and telling them they have a gender identity when their lived experience is that gender reinforces their oppression hurts people? Why is that ok? It does feel as though trans people are entitled not to have their feelings hurt but non-trans women aren’t.

You have to differentiate between the mere fact of holding the belief, and the way someone expresses that belief. Maya Forstater would not have won if it had been found she had been treated in the way she was for eg misgendering. The tribunal has found she was treated that way because she held those beliefs per se. So Katie Hopkins the issue would be the way she expressed her belief about Jesy Nelson’s size, not the mere fact she held that belief.

I know you think the tribunal are wrong to conclude Maya Forstater was not a dick to anyone at work but (I still haven’t read it) I am extremely confident they concluded these allegations against her were not true, NOT that the allegations were true but that this is perfectly fine.

have you read the judgment? I really do not think it says it’s fine to hurt peoples feelings Willy nilly. I think it says merely holding gender critical beliefs should not get women fired.

@beautyisthefaceisee have a lovely dinner 😊

No, but people would think I was a right arsehole.
So why does Maya get away and is practically cheered?

Thoughtful post Cantanka, cheers.

Will think about it.

and thanks! One of those have to go but would really rather sit on my backside and chill.

@babyjellyfish shes being cheered all over social media and will no doubt get a pay out and/or some exposure off the back of it so i think shes done just fine. Shame about the vulnerable trans people who shes exploiting to get that though, as if they don't already face enough criticisim.

Have I lost the plot here ? Is you suggesting that Maya is exploiting trans people ?

Maya - the woman forced out of her job because vulnerable transpeople objected to her none offensive statements ?