I am so over pronouns.

[TheDogAndDogAtCrutchley]

I don’t care if I never hear another pronoun again. It’s not like they’re moving grammar along nicely now, is it?

Yes. The reasons pronoun compliance is pushed so hard is that it advances a situation where everyone has to accept men can literally be women in all and every situation ( not just being nice to Jean who used to be John in the work canteen) , and it denies the language they need to those who object. You can’t coherently object if you have to refer to those males as women, especially when you can’t even get to the end of a sentence without the constant interruption of ‘you mean she’.

Like most hashtag fads, it's just got boring now.

It'll fade out, no doubt, and some people will find the next thing to obsess about and seek attention with.🙄

you know perfectly well that use of "pronouns" in this context is a whole topic, and not just the grammatical construct that is pronouns.

It is shorthand jargon which is a succinct way of describing Gender Ideology, not an attack on grammar as such.

People who make this argument think they are being so clever, but they are revealing a level of dickishness that is entertaining to observe, as much as it is tiresomely boring.

It's perfectly obvious that the op is referring to pronoun declarations, waved like a passport of approval.

I assume that they mean it gives them extra rights.

If a man refers to himself as she then they can use the women's loos etc.

I don't think that meets any dictionary definition of inclusivity that I've heard of, it's just the right to do things that belong to the opposite sex.

I had an assessment with a private consultant last week. Just me and him in the room. While checking name and DOB he asked my pronouns. I said I didn’t have any. He said I must. I said no, I didn’t. He could use what he likes. He said no, I must tell him. I said I was clearly female so go from there. He said I must tell him as he couldn’t assume. I said just use sex based pronouns and we’ll be fine.

It's like a Monty Python sketch at this point.

their practice is to use their pronouns (she/her- it's an entirely female organisation) in all publications and on their website as a way to reassure women that when they seek legal advice they will be speaking with a woman.

But that’s exactly the issue, isn’t it?
Who guarantees that the ‘she/her’ a client of this organisation is seeking legal advice from is actually a biological woman?
‘She/her’ can refer to a biological man who identifies as a woman, so how exactly does that ‘reassure women’?
To me, an organisation that uses pronouns in this way signals that they sign up to the gender ideology, so there is no guarantee that a ‘she/her’ is actually an biological woman.

Exactly.

Some Anecdata / a pseudo case study : I spent 6 years working in a school (in the USA) which intentionally used gender neutral pronouns for everyone. It seemed a bit extra to me in 2016 before everything became more mainstream - but I loved so many things about the ethos that I took the job and rolled with it. And it makes so so much sense to me now.

teenagers (and adults) are forever searching for their identity. Allowing them to try different things without pigeon hole-ing them or making it a ‘thing’ - is, in my experience, the best way to manage that. It meant that it never became a controversial issue that other teenagers would chose to jump on. It means it never hijacks other social issues or v. Crucially their learning.

of course we affirmed their right to express within school appropriate boundaries. But other than that, neutral pronouns, mutual respect and peace. It was an extremely peaceful + learning focussed environment.

The less of a ‘big deal’ society makes it, the more the people it impacts can quietly get on with their life without having to fight about it.

Yet another person who has absolutely no idea how far this has gone.

People are "encouraged", by their employers, to add their pronouns in their email sign off. We accept the concept of coercive control in relationships, why is it so hard to accept that people may feel similarly coerced if that feel their livelihood is at stake. Your post is just more gaslighting.

It's offensive for you to include women's suffrage as an example. Women literally did not have access to the apparatus of democracy to plead their case for equality because they were not allowed to vote. See also the civil rights movement.

Trans people have the same rights as everyone else under the Equality Act 2010 and then some extra ones afforded by the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

When women are being raped in prison, females are losing out in sport and young women are being told that the solution to all their problems is testosterone and a double mastectomy I will not take a deep breath and let go.

As the people who suffocate themselves with the stench of their own manufactured virtue say, "go educate yourself".

Mysterian always uses pronouns.

So in their expression of gender were children allowed to use facilities, such as toilets and changing rooms of the opposite sex?

Are you sure no one objected to that? Or was it that the girls were forced into compliance by being made out to be bigoted or not cool enough if they objected to boys who said they were girls in their spaces?

I know that in the USA children are able to get radical elective mastectomies and other 'gender affirming' surgeries and hormone blockers at an earlier age than here, do you think this environment you worked in encouraged such radical harms to children?

I wish we had a formal pronoun equivalent to sir/madam like 'per' or something to use for someone we don't know, the grammatical equivalent of 'to whom it may concern'.

I don't like being told people's pronouns in neutral customer service type situations, like I sent back some clothes and the person answering my email added pronouns to their email.

I will never refer to that person in the third person, I don't care what the person's pronouns are, I don't want to make the emotional effort to have to consider the feelings of someone when I'm only saying 'can I return this product please'.

What else could we add? Maybe we should add tags to our signatures revealing our class background so people can be well informed about that?

as an aside, i have spent many years being misgendered (i don't care - in fact the below will reveal how it has advantaged me) by email and Teams chat (I don't have a photo - i hate photos of me)

I have been misgendered as a man. And therefore, when emailing an explanation of something i have not been second guessed and needled and a 3rd manly opinion asked for. I know this happens because my colleague, with a photo in her profile and a name that is considered female, has that kind of pushback all the time. Most memorably when i received a forwarded mail from her that contained perfectly good information, requesting my opinion. it started Dear Sir and it happened to her a lot.

I also have a female gendered name but since my time in the army (which i speak about a bit at work, on teams chats and by IM previously) i have only ever gone by Initial + Surname. I have been very careful to disguise my gender as much as possible (i don't go out of my way to do so) but it does mean that on personal meeting people sometimes do a double take. And sometimes, sigh, afterwards i am questioned and second guessed.

10, 20, 30 years ago? I would NEVER have "included my pronouns". Unless i put he/him just to make sure that i was always treated with the respect my experience and ability deserved.

(off topic: does this mean you have read Woman on the Edge of Time? that's what they use, don't they?)

People who base pronouns on a gender identity rather than biological sex are not being ‘a bit more proactive’, they are completely changing what pronouns mean.

Since the OP isn’t contributing to the thread, this is speculation, but I assumed it was about new pronouns, not pronoun declaration. Ze/zir/hir/xyr etc.

My pronouns are chocolate/sofa.

’It’s’ is not a pronoun, ‘its’ is a pronoun.

@HiHoHiHoltsOffToWorkWeGo

Some years ago - before anyone added (she / her) to their email signatures, I worked with a woman called Jamie - and yes, she'd always been called Jamie, it was on her birth certificate, and had always been a woman

She was enormously fed up of being misgendered - and was constantly having to deal with external people who weren't expecting Jamie to be a woman. Her email signature read "Miss Jamie Smith" in an effort to be gendered correctly at least some of the time. It wasn't always terribly effective

I can only imagine that having (she / her) on her email has been something of a relief to her

Maybe, just maybe, a culture of declaring pronouns does some people good and does you no harm at all

I have an obviously female first name but since my late 20s I've had senior positions. Ever since I've been misgendered in correspondence and emails and when I arrive at external meetings a man is expected because if I'm the boss so I must be a man.

It helps me quickly understand who operates by prejudice and sloppy assumptions.

Even though it's annoying I won't be using pronouns. If people can't work it out from Mrs and my feminine first name that's their problem

Having your pronoun or title on your email is useful if you have a name that's ambiguous. I don't subscribe to making it compulsory on emails or badges (my name is obviously female, I also look feminine so no need for me) but the option for those who want it doesn't hurt me dies it?

I've had sticky situations where I didn't know someone's gender from their name and caused an issue with logistics ... knowing someone's gender is useful including if they are choosing to be different eg you can place the non binary person a long distance from the emeritus professor who will put their foot in it!

“…it does no harm” 🙄

Such gaslighting and naivety. Those that really believe this, please educate yourselves.

I regularly attend national conferences in a ‘woke’ sector and I can tell you op that resistance is still strong. Out of around 100-200 people you may get a handful of pronouns but the vast majority are without and that has stayed static for a while now.

Hopefully the silliness has reached the peak contagion limits for those who are soft in the brain enough to fall for it.

In my line of work, as a language teacher, the only good that's come of this is that more people now know what the word pronoun means.

This is why using pronouns is harmful to women: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-happened-when-a-man-signed-work-emails-using-a-female-name-for-a-week_n_58c2ce53e4b054a0ea6a4066

Women are treated better by men if men don't know they're conversing with a woman.

That poster who spoke of a female Jamie, probably doesn't realise that before she added female pronouns, she was probably better treated by men who assumed they were conversing with a man.

If you support people who "want to be something else' does that mean you support able-bodied people who identify as disabled or white people who identify as black? What about people who identify as babies and wear nappies? There are a lot of those about. If not, what's the difference between a man identifying as a woman and the above examples?

I think pronouns affect us all when used in a court room, particularly when describing how she, with her penis raped another woman.