I need explanation of both sides of pronoun in emails debate please

[psed]

I am against putting my pronouns in emails and in bios etc. as I understand that drawing attention to my sex can result in unconscious sex-based bias. My DH puts his pronouns on his emails to support non binary and/or trans people feel ok about stating they/their as pronouns. He wants to normalise it for them, because they are (also) a marginalised group. He admits he has no personal awareness of any non binary or trans people who may have experienced difficulties with pronouns.

But…. he sees it that by supporting one group of people by putting his pronouns, he is marginalising the other. Or if he removes his pronouns to support females, he is marginalising trans and non binary people.

I and he would like to try and understand both sides, and the reasons why to put or not put pronouns. Is there a way to support both groups? I do know I’m posting here, so will get mostly support for not putting pronouns. Please can everyone use as basic language as possible, I am disabled and struggle with comprehension at times

There is quite a lot on pronouns on this board already OP, if you Google search Mumsnet and preferred pronouns you will find previous threads, mostly for arguments against using preferred pronouns I imagine, as has been said here before, it is outing for trans people and encourages sexism against women (noted by the story do when a male and female colleague swapped email accounts.)

Yes, hence why I was asking for the other sides views. However we are both time short and wanted a quick and simple take on the question can you support one group without not marginalising the other?

People who argue in favour say what's the big deal it's only pronouns. It's helpful. Everyone has pronouns etc.
Personally I think it reinforces unhelpful binary assumptions about gender so it's not something I want to do.
There are more marginalised women than trans women or non binary people I would guess. Given the women are approximately 50% of the population. So supporting women seems more important to me. But let your H work it out for himself.

Surely not adding pronouns is the neutral thing to do anyway? You're not making a statement either way then.

I would say it is not one group vs the other. It can have negative consequences for both women (sex based unconscious bias) and trans/non binary (making them out themselves when they are not yet fully comfortable /haven't decided). You cannot see it as 1 group vs the other.

As others have said, not adding them us a neutral stance. It is also does not 'out' anyone, as GC, trans, nonbinary or any other identity or ideology.

Nor does it compel speech.

Most of all it is redundant in emails anyway as you respond directly to the person you are emailing and would have no need of any other identifier than first names or you and I.

So it is, and always has been, a power play by some.

I won't use them because of that.

As I understand it, the argument for displaying pronouns is that it normalises the idea that you can't assume someone's pronouns, which facilitates acceptance of non-binary gender identities, makes it easier for gender non-conforming people to be open about their identities and reassures people that you are an ally to the trans community.

About 20 years ago I used to work with a lady who was trans. She never declared her pronouns. It was obvious that she presented as a woman and should be addressed as such. If people assume your pronouns they will be correct in 99% of cases, there is usually no need for people (including trans people) to declare their pronouns. In the rare case when people get it wrong you just politely say “I prefer he/she”.

If Gender Critical is a protected belief, then I should not be under any pressure to -buy in to- “facilitate acceptance” of non-binary identities. I’ve always thought, that if asked I would say I don’t have pronouns. Use the ones that you think are appropriate.

Strike through fail!

In my view there is a way to support both women and people who identify as trans and/or non-binary.

(Please note I do not believe that it is necessary or right to support the group who demand pronouns in email signatures, especially since many of them are not trans or non-binary themselves.)

To support women, I would

1. not personally demand or display pronouns in email signatures and

1. raise awareness of why emphasising certain characteristics of an employee can result in that employee being disadvantaged at work. And why this is so bad for women.

To support the trans and non-binary community, I would

1. not oppose an additional, voluntary field being added to email signatures and I would not argue with those who chose to use it as long as they do not demand that everyone must declare pronouns and

1. respect people's pronoun choices in a professional environment, especially if I am interacting with those who have expressed a preference.

That's what I think too Charlie Parley. Also, off topic - my father built the desk that the Two Ronnies sat at the end of the show when they said “It’s goodnight from me”.

Ask him if he would wear a headscarf to make it easier for Muslim women to wear headscarves at work.

There are so many causes. Work should be free of discrimination and harassment and external politics should stay out.

Why does he want to show his support to one specific group in his email signature?

Why doesn't he want to show his support to wheelchair users in his email signature, or to gay people, or pregnant women, or carers, or black people?

Both Blaire White and Contrapoints (both transwomen) have been explicit about the fact they would like you to assume their pronouns because they feel they are obvious. Contrapoints was "cancelled" for saying that stating pronouns was for the benefit of NB people and to the detriment of transwomen.

As far as I'm concerned, if you state your pronouns, you're stating that you have a gender identity. I don't so I haven't.

I also don't agree that I have a gender identity and question the whole existence of gender as a thing. My sex is obvious from my name, and in fact most people who I email know me anyway.

Agree many people use it as point scoring and power play.

And what @CharlieParley said.

It's so that having pronouns in a bio/email sig. isn't something only trans people do (and hence something outing). Also I see it as someone having their pronouns in a bio/email sig. means I can safely assume that they wouldn't agree with any PP, and I'd be more open talking about trans related things with them.

From Peter Daly's article on Maya Forstater's case:

“ Similarly, policies which demand a positive adoption of tenets of Gender Theory - such as directing the mandatory insertion of pronouns in email footers – are not the tool of inclusivity that they may have been presented or even intended: such practices may exclude those with protected Gender Critical beliefs (quite apart from the fact that they may necessitate the outing of trans people who have no desire to be outed). They may be evidence of the hostile environment described at s.26(1)(b) Equality Act 2010, providing support to claims of unlawful harassment, or otherwise demonstrate direct or indirect discrimination.”

By putting pronouns on e-mails he is creating a hostile work environment for those who do not want to put pronouns on e-mails, including the transgender/non binary people he is claiming to support who do not want to out themselves.