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?

You sound mental. And unprofessional.

then I'd just keep on saying "woman" not "cis woman"

Is he consciously excluding trans men from his dating pool? if not, he's transphobic

You have not encountered any 'Ze, Xe, zie...' people yet then.

that is where a thorough grasp of what "intersectionality" actually is

so in some ways you have privilege, in other ways he has privilege. If he doesn't understand that he needs to hand back all his rainbows

Maybe the solution is to provide pronouns but indicate they are only used in situations where the email sender will be referred to in the third person: 'if you wish to make a complaint about me, my manager's email is blah blah and my pronouns are blah blah

@lilacsinbloom I think the fad began when companies realised they could pretend to care about equality / staff well-being by making tokenistic gestures, at no cost

Addressing gender pay gap, employing staff with disabilities? Nah, that's too difficult

Pronouns on emails? Oh, yes let's do that

If employers really cared about equality, there are so many other (better) things they could do

100% .

Cheap way to virtue signal equality without actually having to do anything.

And it actually enables them to remove sex based provisions for women, win win in the minds of some employer's I'd say.

You do realise the irony here is that when it comes to pronouns the reason we now see them everywhere is so MEN can declare themselves she / her?!? So your example is a great one of why it's so fricking dangerous!

As @GarlicGrace and most others on here pointed out: “It's not about all pronouns, as any fool can see. And "pronouns" are NOT harmless.”

Probably the best takedown of Preferred Pronoun Culture I’ve seen.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

I have no issue with someone basing their pronouns on their gender identity.

Except it's not "their" pronouns by any stretch of the imagination. If anything pronouns could be argued to "belong" to the speaker, which makes it compelled speech.

^ this!

Understanding/belief in gender identity isn’t universal.

if the NHS calls a male bodied person she/her, there is a risk they will be called for cervical screening they don’t need (thus wasting an appt). Some of these individuals want the opportunity to spread their legs and bare all for an unsuspecting nurse and don’t take kindly to being told that they don’t have a cervix or anywhere to stick a speculum. They may also miss vital prostate screening.

There was a case of a transman not being called for screening and having cervical cancer who then tried to sue the NHS. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I hide it well though so…

I would agree with you IF the gender identity words and pronouns were not for some weird reason the same words as the ones used for sex.

This is obviously a problem because when a person picks she/her to indicate the mental gender, they are also implying (through the use of she/her, words that originally described the female sex) this mental gender has some relationship to the female sex.

As a person of the female sex this is an issue for me, because (1) I consider the idea that being female involves a particular type of mind or character sexist, offensive, disempowering and at times physically dangerous for female people, and (2) it means that resources originally reserved for female people are being opened up to male simply through a co-incidence of language, and (3) it takes away the ability to make clear political statements about sex and to politicise and lobby based on sex.

Literally ALL the problems /"culture war" around trans identities are not to do with trans people themselves, and everything to do with this weird insistance on using the same words to mean both sex and gender. They are different things, and they should have different words. Then we can have a sensible and meaningful conversation about what people might need because of their gender without taking away what they might need because of their sex.

Nope, not a chance. The pronouns are what they are referred to as, just respect that.

I would like to be referred to as EhrlicheFrau. Is that OK?

Since I am also EhrlicheFrau, MN should allow me access to your log in details so I can post under my preferred name. Is that OK?

Since I am also EhrlicheFrau, I have as much right as you to say what EhrlicheFrau thinks. Is that OK?

just respect that.

I'm not 'respecting' falsehood and delusion. Sorry.

Why would anyone have the right to demand someone overrides the evidence of their eyes and ears? That's Orwellian dystopia in real life.

Yes, of course your identity must be respected, EhrlicheFrau, and if MNHQ exclude you from your self-identified account, you should sue them.

I think the trend is moving on. Except for a few him/they's or actual trans colleagues who find it useful, our workplace has finally given up making women who look/dress/speak like women with clearly female names put she/her on their emails. Same for the men.
As an actual gay I felt no 'allyship' in the enforced encouragement to announce pronouns, if anything it just annoyed people and alled being LGBTQ etc with being bloody annoying

But the pronouns are not just what they are referred to as. According to this ideology they reflect what the person actually and literally is, in all circumstances. And that’s where the objections lie. Because it clearly harms women to say men can literally be women in all circumstances and you all have to accept that.

I think most people didn’t when we thought that’s all it represented. But now we are being told gender identity trumps sex, and in all and every sphere, so that one’s gender identity means your body is literally female, even in sports and changing rooms.

So then we started to see how pronouns enforcement was not a nicety to respect someone’s inner state, but the infantry division sent as the advance to force change on women, without our consent.

I think you both have a point, and I certainly agree with you @NeedToChangeName
I was just talking to a friend about it the other day - it’s so easy for employers to virtue-signal and pretend to care about their employees by simply doing things like introducing pronouns in email signatures.
Much easier than trying to accommodate staff with disabilities/ mental health issues/ care responsibilities outside work and so on.

But then they potentially completely change the meaning/ function of these words. You might be okay with it, others aren’t and prefer words to have actual meanings.

Nope, not a chance that I will refer to a man as a woman with female pronouns. Fuck that. Just respect it. And respect womens rights to say NO.