Pronouns in my email signature

[GinTonic]

I've been asked to state my personal pronouns in my work email signature. Grateful for any advice on how to deal with this? It's being presented as optional but I feel it's discriminatory as it's putting me under pressure to reveal my personal views on subjects which up to now I have not shared in the workplace. Thanks all.

Buzz, in my case it would be trousers.

Maybe I'll do that tomorrow for the lolz.

Such good ideas - what about a lanyard with alternating - ENOUGH ALREADY - EYE ROLL EMOJI - MAKE IT STOP - EYE ROLL ...etc.

I don’t believe it is my place to instruct you on what pronouns to use about me
I see it the other way round, I think: I believe people should have the opportunity to state which pronouns they would like others to use about them.

But why? Why would you be so controlling? You might as well demand people curtesy when they meet you.

Looks like the way to go will be bla bla they (who must be obeyed) , and the committee approved so Xhie (who must be obeyed) said it would be a ruined asap.

(WMBO) after every compelled pronoun.
Or is there a curtesy/salute emoji?

*actioned
Though a ruined is likely to be appropriate, and make just as much sense.

Why would you be so controlling? You might as well demand people curtesy when they meet you.

Please can you watch your tone? And not jump to conclusions?

I'm not talking about me. I don't have and am not about to get my pronouns on my email sign-off; I'm not 'controlling' anything. I'm approaching it from the other way round.

I can well imagine stumbling into a situation where I referred to someone via email as (e.g.) 'she will be in touch as soon as the process is complete' and then 'she' getting upset/pissed off because their preferred pronoun was 'he'.
If people had their preferred pronouns on their email sign-offs there'd be no pressure or anxiety, and no faux pas, because you'd know how to refer to them.

If people had their preferred pronouns on their email sign-offs there'd be no pressure or anxiety, and no faux pas, because you'd know how to refer to them.

I can imagine quite a lot of pressure & anxiety as well as the risk of faux pas if one has to trawl through people's emails to double check their current choice of pronoun when referring to them elsewhere.

Primarily due to the significant & growing amount of additional time required.

*Please can you watch your tone? And not jump to conclusions?

I'm not talking about me.*

Apologies for using "you" when I should have said "one". I meant it in a more general sense rather than you personally.

In reflection maybe one should just use "one" instead of pronouns for the avoidance of offence to those (who must be obeyed).

*on reflection

I can well imagine stumbling into a situation where I referred to someone via email as (e.g.) 'she will be in touch as soon as the process is complete' and then 'she' getting upset/pissed off because their preferred pronoun was 'he'.

That person would need to grow the fuck up then.

If people had their preferred pronouns on their email sign-offs there'd be no pressure or anxiety, and no faux pas, because you'd know how to refer to them.

Given the number of people who can't be bothered to spell my name correctly, despite it being at the bottom of my emails, I very much doubt it would help.

whyamidoingthis is right; individuals insisting on their own special pronouns are, whether intentionally or not, setting up a multitude of traps for the feet of others.

The ultimate, litigious example is JY who is making a life, even a living, from setting up situations where she can pose as the victim and express synthetic outrage before going to law.

She is an extreme, but even the workplace pronoun-enforcers, backed by compliant organisations and authorities, could easily spend substantial chunks of their working day combing emails and reading documents to find outdated or accidental mis-namings to complain about.

No doubt many, even most, will simply shrug and carry on, just like whyamidoingthis and I do. My given name is one of those variants with two pronunciations and two spellings - think Caroline and Carolyn - and my parents in their questionable wisdom, pronounced my name one way and spelt it the other. People who know me from email mispronounced my name on the whenever they speak to me and people who know me face to face misspell my name when they write it.

I have never been cross or indignant or affronted or

Oops, posted too soon - fat finger syndrome!

I think everything depends on how vigilant variant pronoun-users are, how pompous they plan to be about mistakes and how organisations enforce sanctions against those who offend, accidentally or intentionally.

This is all going to get very old very quickly and I dread to think what it will cost business.

What's in a name?

I present this without comment: www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202000011201/ (please have any prescribed blood pressure medication necessary to hand)

I think everything depends on how vigilant variant pronoun-users are, how pompous they plan to be about mistakes and how organisations enforce sanctions against those who offend, accidentally or intentionally.

I think the more vigilant and pompous the better. Once it starts becoming costly in terms of time, money and staff morale, the quicker it will die a death.

Another thing I think really needs challenging more is this ‘it costs nothing’ idea. Compelling speech costs people in terms of their personal integrity and human rights to hold beliefs, as well as the previously mentioned disability inclusion issues.

Another thing I think really needs challenging more is this ‘it costs nothing’ idea.

I completely agree. Adding to your points, the contribution of explicitly stating you are female to unconscious bias, and the consequent negative impact on women's careers, means it very much does cost. Here is a research paper that discusses the impact of unconscious bias on women's careers. By including pronouns in our email signature, we are effectively activating the unconscious biases of the recipient.

Research also shows that gendered language increases bias against women here and here. These two articles advocate using gender neutral language to avoid bias.

There is no way in hell I am adding something to my email signature that activates unconscious bias against me and may ultimately impact on my career progression.

I'm not really understanding this thread. My whole approach to this issue is about not offending people, but here I seem to be offending people left right and centre

To me it's just like someone introducing themselves and saying 'Hi, I'm Christopher but everyone calls me Chris' so I know what to call them.

And I like Ihaventgottimeforthis's approach and think that everyone should also have the option to not have their pronouns on their sign-off.

When we are asked to include our preferred pronouns on our own email sign-off, rather than just agree to comply with requests to use someone else's preferred pronouns, it feels like being invite - or compelled - to enter an alternate reality.

It feels as if we are being signed up to a belief that gender is something as malleable as hair colour or skirt length. I don't feel comfortable with that, largely because it has a thin-end-of-the-wedge vibe about it that makes me want to resist.

I could be wrong about that, but if I'm not any more worried about being referred to by the wrong pronoun than I am by having my given name misspelt, which happens to me all the time, why should I state my pronouns?

My concerns are first that it makes me look as if I'm signed up to a set of beliefs I don't hold, secondly that companies and organisations seem to be committed to offering some kind of herd immunity or protective colouration to those whose pronouns are variants of the norm (Let's just make everyone do it and you won't be singled out) which should not be necessary in a democratic, equal and civilised society. Why isn't it enough for people to say they'll happily comply with any requests to use whatever is the latest version of others' preferred pronouns but prefer to leave their own pronouns to others.

If something's not broken, why should we be expected to exert ourselves to fix it, especially at work where there is always more than enough to do?

if I'm not any more worried about being referred to by the wrong pronoun than I am by having my given name misspelt, which happens to me all the time, why should I state my pronouns?
That's why I favour the option I mentioned above: that everyone CAN opt out if they want to.

I'd be more concerned that I currently have both a 'gender-neutral' name and a gender-neutral title that I worked damn hard for and that is useful to me professionally.

I prefer not to have to announce, 'But I'm female, so you can be sexist at me after all!' at the end of every email.

I will refuse..and face disciplinary over it if needs be!

As will I.

I have a gender neutral name

So do I, although .... it's written in pink at the foot of my emails. Does that give the game away? Or just add a further layer of complexity?

Why wouldn't you just put your preferred pronoun in? It's just makes life more welcoming and comfortable for trans and non binary ppl and causes no harm to anyone else.

It does. This ubiquitous bullshit harms women!!

To me it's just like someone introducing themselves and saying 'Hi, I'm Christopher but everyone calls me Chris' so I know what to call them.

I have a name like that. The difference is, I don't start logging hate crimes and whining about literal violence if I get called "Christine". Or if someone uses "Sir" when they see "Chris".

And if people want to call me "bastard fuckface" behind my back, that's up to them. It's not my business to police it.

Lordfrontpaw My jaw is dropping. I don't know if I am understanding this as well as I think I am, but if I amgood lord.

You are, you non-trans woman, you.