Can someone please help me out with pronouns

[Lollygaggles]

So how do I stand in terms of the current legislation, if I refer to a person by the pronouns of their birth, rather than their preferred pronouns?

Would it be compelled speech to be forced to collude with a belief that I do not accept? Also, how does my freedom not to be discriminated against because of my beliefs ( ie that people can't change sex) play out against the protections of Gender Reassignment and the trans person's rights as a legal member of the opposite sex ( though not a biological one.)

Would I be acting in a discriminatory way under the EA by referring to a person as their birth sex, when they have transitioned?

I want to be able to articulate my position very clearly, with reference to the law, but I don't actually know where we are as the law stands on competing rights.

Can anyone help me unpick it please?

Testing, you're not required to "pretend" anything - again, see the Maya Forstater case. You are entitled to your beliefs, what you aren't entitled to do is deliberately create a hostile atmosphere for a co-worker. Outright refusing to use a trans person's preferred pronouns under any circumstance, even just for politeness's sake, is actually a pretty hard-line extreme position, and you'd have an extremely hard time convincing a disciplinary board that there's any good reason why you can't just show a bit of basic politeness and respect between the hours of 9-5.

Imagine if a co-worker adheres to a religion you don't believe in. Are you required to believe in their religion? No, of course not. You're perfectly entitled to believe it's a load of bull, in fact. But if you spend all day telling that person you think their religion is bull at every available opportunity, they'd have good grounds to complain about harassment - not because you don't believe their religion, but because of the way you're behaving about it. This is about behaviour, not belief, and like it or not, deliberately and persistently calling someone by pronouns you know they don't use is rude behaviour by every reasonable standard.

Would I be acting in a discriminatory way under the EA by referring to a person as their birth sex, when they have transitioned

Yes.

And being really arsey, too.

You are talking about someone who has transitioned.

I am a GC feminist, I am defined by my sex, but pronouns can refer to sex or gender.

Look at the French language wrt Le and La, Son / Sa that gender non human, non sexed nouns.

Surely we can withstand trans-extremist ideology and defend sex based rights without being arsey to individual Trans people?

I am a GC feminist. I have dear friends who are trans. A valued co-worker who is trans. I am not anti trans, I am not transphobic. Why would I humiliate them by insisting that I choose their pronouns?

I will argue with them if they start to assert that they can take part in women’s competitive sport but Transwomen are Trans Women and can be called she if they wish.

TalkingToLangCleg - I'm actually very familiar with the Forstater case and have read the judgement in close detail. I'm aware she's appealing - that does not mean the judgement is not relevant or that it doesn't stand, nor is her appeal very likely at all to be successful.

Do you really think your personal beliefs about sex and gender are always more important than anyone else's right to a little bit of politeness, privacy and dignity?

Or alternatively, do you really think your personal beliefs about sex and gender are more important than mine?

Why is it that you view those of us who use pronouns according to sex as rude and unpleasant, yet you don't view those who think that pronouns should correspond to some internal essence of gender as rude and unpleasant in coercing the rest of us to go along with their bizarre belief system?

Outright refusing to use a trans person's preferred pronouns under any circumstance, even just for politeness's sake, is actually a pretty hard-line extreme position,

Really? It's an extreme position to not want to call a man "she"? What is that other than being forced to pretend a man is a woman?

I actually find it far more concerning at school, where adults are expected to call girls "he".

In my opinion this forced speech is an incredibly dangerous development, and going along with it for "politeness" is cowardly and doing a disservice to all the future detransitioners.

@RobinMoiraWhite

Most trans people of my acquaintance would regard someone of the OP’s persuasion with sadness for someone so hung up on prejudice that they can’t bring themselves to find a way to act respectfully towards others they disagree with

Surely that works both ways? Most women of my acquaintance would regard someone of a transgender persuasion with sadness for them being so hung up on believing in the ability to change sex, that they can't behave respectfully to those women who disagree with them.

If I had to refer to a MtF person as 'she', it's absolutely not because I believe they are female, it's because I'd be worried about upsetting their mental health further by not colluding with their dysphoria.
Now I'm retired, I don't need to be worried about losing my job because I won't go along with this untruth. Just like I won't agree with my very thin anorexic friend that she's fat.

Imagine if a co-worker adheres to a religion you don't believe in. Are you required to believe in their religion? No, of course not.

But that is exactly what is being demanded here. Adherence to the genderist religion, where people can miraculously change sex, and anyone who doesn't believe this is a heretic.

Demanding the use of specific pronouns, even when the person being referred to is not present, is like demanding that everyone complies with the requirements of that person's religion.

I respect the fact that some people believe in gender and believe that they can change sex. But I do not believe in these things. I should not be forced to believe them or forced to use the language demanded by their religious beliefs.

if you spend all day telling that person you think their religion is bull at every available opportunity,

You have that backwards. We are being asked to spend all day signalling that we agree with the person's religious beliefs when we do not.

I do not call Catholic priests Father because I do not share their religious beliefs.

In my opinion people need to think long and hard about the dominance displays we are expected to submit to on the daily, and the effect that has on shaping our world view.

Ninja'd by OldCrone!!

Yes, Testing, it is an extreme position. The mumsnet boards have unfortunately become a bit of an echo chamber, but by any reasonable standards, and in any real world case, a complete and outright refusal to respect any trans identity under any circumstance is indeed an extremist position.

As YnMnBlue points out, even most GC feminists wouldn't outright refuse to use a trans person's pronouns under any circumstance. There's being gender critical and then there's just being anti-trans, and the attitude you're displaying is the latter.

I'd be worried about upsetting their mental health further by not colluding with their dysphoria.

This is the reason we're asked to be kind. So as not to upset people who are very fragile.

So why is it that we're told it's not a mental health problem?

@HedgeWitch79

But if you spend all day telling that person you think their religion is bull at every available opportunity, they'd have good grounds to complain about harassment - not because you don't believe their religion, but because of the way you're behaving about it

No one is saying to tell the trans person that they're not a male/female at every available opportunity. However, if I were having a conversation about religion with, say, a Jew, I would be honest about the beliefs I hold and those they hold that I didn't agree with. I wouldn't expect them to agree with my beliefs or for them to expect me to agree with theirs. That's not harassment.

I'm actually very familiar with the Forstater case and have read the judgement in close detail

And yet you actively choose to misrepresent what Maya Forstater said and did, HedgeWitch.Interesting.

But not really so surprising for someone so wedded to misogyny as you.

So many posters with brand new or minimal posting histories telling us off. What’s new eh?

Third person pronouns are used when the person isn’t even present. If a person insists that, when they are being discussed when they aren’t present, that people absolutely have to use words they have chosen, it’s no different to Trump insisting all of the Press refer to him as an infectious diseases expert.

There’s no risk to the mental health of a trans person if I was conversing with them because I would say “you”.

The only risk from a conversation in which a trans person wasn’t there would be if someone else relayed back to that trans person that I had used the correct sex pronoun for them, which is creepy as fuck/secret, thought policing. “I need to tell you something, NotBad called you ‘he’. Do you want me call Officer Gul?”

And if a trans person’s mental health can’t handle the way other people talk about them in their absence, then it’s unlikely this is going to be limited to pronouns, and their therapy should focus on this. It must be awful to live a life that requires external validation submission from everyone, but given it’s not likely or possible, maybe that’s something that should be addressed as part of the health support for this non-mental health issue?

In the meantime, in my daily life, I won’t call the Earth flat if a Flat Earther insists on it, I won’t call Trump the World’s Greatest President if he insists on it, and I will continue to use pronouns attaining to a person’s sex. I will not have my speech, in my own house, in my own conversations, controlled by the demands of others.

Outright refusing to use a trans person's preferred pronouns under any circumstance, even just for politeness's sake, is actually a pretty hard-line extreme position,

It's really not, and I strongly suspect that those who want it to be are in for a nasty surprise as the general public begins to discuss this issue more.

HedgeWitch79

As many tranwomen who are HSTS (homosexual transsexuals) are AGP (autogynephiles).

In your official capacity, how would you advise somebody if they knew that every time they used a female pronoun for a man with AGP, he was becoming sexually aroused?

Imagine if a co-worker adheres to a religion you don't believe in. Are you required to believe in their religion? No, of course not. You're perfectly entitled to believe it's a load of bull, in fact.

But by your reasoning, if a co-worker adheres to a religion that says everyone must address them as “Most High Supreme Ruler of the Universe” at all times, I am creating a hostile environment for them if I don’t or won’t. So you’re saying we do actually have to behave as if we believe in their religion, whether we do or not. Even when we know this is detrimental to our own rights and our own interests.

So hedge, an extreme response to not believing in transgender ideology is:
Calling someone by the name they request
Treating them as any other person I come across
Not using "she" if they are male or "he" if female

I would use "they" if I thought using sex-based pronouns would cause offence.

You literally regard anything less than full compliance with compelled speech as an extreme position.

It's really not, and I strongly suspect that those who want it to be are in for a nasty surprise as the general public begins to discuss this issue more.

Agreed Kittens

I am a GC feminist

Course you are, dear 🤣🤣🤣

You literally regard anything less than full compliance with compelled speech as an extreme position.

The classic MO of the TRA/ally.

I’m still waiting for you to explain, btw, HedgeWitch, why you’re not remotely interested in equality for the women who know that using false pronouns harms them and takes away their rights.

Why don’t women deserve equality from an equality officer? Why aren’t you concerned about the hostile environment created for women when they are compelled to lie and go against their own beliefs, and indeed collude with and enable an ideology they believe and know to be deeply unethical, and detrimental to them personally?

The public response to anyone who can't bear to hear the "wrong" pronouns to the point where they're complaining to HR should be "get a grip". And soon will be if current pandemic related patience levels continue.

Soontobe60, if you're using the wrong pronouns for someone - for example, referring to a transwoman as "he" - then you are indeed asserting your belief that they are not a woman (and not even accepting them as a transwoman) every single time you do that. It's not a neutral thing, you are actively and repeatedly asserting your rejection of their identity every single time you refer to them. I think there's a great deal of people here who really have their head in the sands as to how it looks and feels to have someone do that to you.

This isn't at all like having a casual conversation with a co-worker who is Jewish and mentioning that you're not. That's obviously fine. This is more like if every single time you refer to your Jewish co-worker by name, you can't just call him Dave, you call him Dave-who-is-Jewish-which-I-think-is-nonsense. See how quickly Dave gets ticked off with you if you do that every single time. And Dave would have every right to file a formal complaint against you, not for not being Jewish but for having such an obvious problem with him being Jewish. Do you get it? By wrong pronouncing a trans person, you are saying every single time you mention them or talk about them that you think their identity is nonsense. You're doing it over and over again. You are incapable of mentioning them without doing it. This isn't some neutral agree-to-disagree thing because you keep on and on and on and on doing it. The actual neutral choice here is to accept pronouns can reflect gender as well as sex. That's not asking you to change your beliefs about biological sex, but it does enable you to have a conversation with, or about, a trans colleague without constantly doing the equivalent of announcing that you think Judaism is rubbish actually every time you talk about Dave.

You seem a bit emotionally invested in this for an HR person, Hedgewitch. Not very professional, that.