Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Pronoun badges for train staff and mis-gendering passengers

233 replies

CervixSampler · 16/06/2021 17:01

Trans woman 'repeatedly misgendered' by Northern Rail worker at Piccadilly https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/trans-woman-hits-out-after-20829187

This article doesn't say if they have a GRC but they have legally changed their name. Lots of information in this with talk of white privilege, mental health being affected by mis-gendering but in light of the Maya ruling last week I'm wondering if staff can be forced to use pronouns that don't match what they see? To use Sir and he then the staff must have seen a male despite the facial surgery, acrylic nails, bra under their top land ponytail. I really struggle when things don't match as it were and my brain just can't compute it (awaiting ASD assessment) It's like a trans Stroop test. Just because I see a pony tail, long nails, and feminine facial features it doesn't mean that I will see a woman if other factors say male. Height, build, mannerisms, speech, voice, gait etc would all be interpreted as male and counter any feminine dressing and make up on the surface.

OP posts:
DelilahDingleberry · 16/06/2021 20:25

Those of you saying you would “always” use sex based pronouns, how do you know you haven’t met a very “passable” transgender person? And again, are you really unable to see the difference between accidentally misgendering someone (whether transgender or not) and repeatedly using pronouns that you’ve been asked not to use.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 16/06/2021 20:39

It could be argued that pronouns are value neutral. They are purely a word to refer to a person of a particular sex. It is not harmful to call a woman "he", or a man "she". It is a mistake. In which case misgendering doesn't matter, it's simply an error of classification, not a judgement of the person.

Arbadacarba · 16/06/2021 20:47

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

It could be argued that pronouns are value neutral. They are purely a word to refer to a person of a particular sex. It is not harmful to call a woman "he", or a man "she". It is a mistake. In which case misgendering doesn't matter, it's simply an error of classification, not a judgement of the person.
Yes, if it happens once. If someone says 'Please don't refer to me as 'he' (or call me 'Sir') and it happens another four or five times, it starts to come across as being deliberately goady.

Suppose my name was 'Jane' and someone, by mistake, called me 'Sarah'. That wouldn't be offensive, just a mistake. But if I said 'My name is Jane, not Sarah' and in the same conversation the person continued to call me 'Sarah' I would conclude at best that they weren't listening to me (not acceptable in a customer service situation) and at worst, that they were doing it to annoy me. And that's a situation without any of the potentially sensitive undertones of misgendering.

MilesOfSand · 16/06/2021 20:49

I don’t think the staff covered themselves in glory but I think switching to a neutral term or no address was the way to go. I don’t believe in compelling pronouns / sexed terms.

AvantGardening · 16/06/2021 20:49

@DelilahDingleberry

If this isn’t misgendering someone, what does misgendering someone look like?

Bearing in mind the Maya Forstater judgement that says GC beliefs are protected beliefs, and also that the judgement cannot be used as a licence to go out and misgender people. There seems to be people on MN arguing that they can, should and will use sex based pronouns whether the person they are talking to likes that or not, but also a massive long thread where people are saying that they do support transpeople. What does support mean if you insist on calling a transperson by pronouns they have asked you not to use? So if misgendering someone isn’t using sex based pronouns, what is it?

I could be wrong but I read that judgement as the question of correctly sexing/misgendering is not addressed by that specific case and so is yet to be considered from a legal point of view.

So not

‘you shouldn’t misgender’

Merely

‘We have not yet considered if correctly sexing would be considered workplace harassment as it’s not relevant to this case or any that has been brought to court’

Not a legal eagle so I could be entirely wrong.

Babdoc · 16/06/2021 20:54

How far does this go?
If I insist I identify as an Empress, and demand to be addressed as “Your imperial majesty” and be curtseyed to, are train staff obliged to humour me with that as well?
And if not, why not? What’s the difference?

AnyOldPrion · 16/06/2021 20:56

Suppose, for the sake of argument, the article was about a natal woman who'd been repeatedly misgendered for whatever reason - do you think the absence of (perceived) 'male privilege' would mean everyone would say 'oh, that's all right then'?

Well as I stated clearly, I am not sure I agree with the point being made, I was simply explaining it.

In either case, I think very few people would say “that’s all right then”, but I think you’re still missing the point, which was about men being believed more than women, and is wholly unrelated to the response of the customer service men and whether their reaction was acceptable or not.

My personal suspicion is that fewer women would query a transman with a similar story, especially if they didn’t appear to be taking testosterone. On the balance of probabilities, I’d say a very tall male who claims to be a woman is more likely to have been aggressive and perceived as a potential threat, thus triggering an aggressive response from the other man (reasonably or unreasonably, depending on how polite you feel customer services personnel should be when faced with aggression) than a female who hasn’t had testosterone.

But that’s fairly nuanced and more related to understanding male and female behaviour patterns than about privilege, or lack of it. In other situations, men are more likely to be listened to and taken seriously.

To ask a related question, how many times have you seen articles about transmen being misgendered, complaining about it and being featured in newspapers? I suspect there is some related sex-based privilege going on.

Arbadacarba · 16/06/2021 20:58

The wording was:

"Just as the legal recognition of civil partnerships does not negate the right of a person to believe that marriage should only apply to heterosexual couples, becoming the acquired gender ‘for all purposes’ within the meaning of GRA does not negate a person’s right to believe, like the claimant, that as a matter of biology a trans person is still their natal sex. Both beliefs may well be profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others, but they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society.”

"This judgment does not mean that the EAT has expressed any view on the merits of either side of the transgender debate and nothing in it should be regarded as so doing. This judgment does not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can ‘misgender’ trans persons with impunity.” (my italics)

I'm not a legal expert either, but I read that as meaning context is important. Expressing a gender-critical viewpoint is protected (1st paragraph) but misgendering an individual repeatedly for the purpose of goading/bullying them wouldn't be (2nd paragraph).

I'm happy to be corrected by anyone with legal expertise.

kowari · 16/06/2021 21:03

@DelilahDingleberry

Those of you saying you would “always” use sex based pronouns, how do you know you haven’t met a very “passable” transgender person? And again, are you really unable to see the difference between accidentally misgendering someone (whether transgender or not) and repeatedly using pronouns that you’ve been asked not to use.
I would use sex based, based on what I perceived their sex to be, as I wouldn't have a clue what their gender was. I would not use pronouns I was asked not to use, at that point I would use gender neutral pronouns. I find it hard enough to switch to gender neutral let alone saying the opposite of what is in front of me though. I find it makes it difficult to focus on the actual communication and I would still be likely to slip up.
Arbadacarba · 16/06/2021 21:05

To ask a related question, how many times have you seen articles about transmen being misgendered, complaining about it and being featured in newspapers? I suspect there is some related sex-based privilege going on.

I agree, you don't tend to see this, but there might be multiple reasons (or a combination of factors) in play. As you say, it may be a matter of privilege - it may be that legacy-privilege means transwomen are more likely to speak out about misgendering and more likely to be heard by journalists.

It may be that it happens less often - I'm not an expert but anecdotally, it seems generally easier for transmen to pass than for transwomen.

KimikosNightmare · 16/06/2021 21:12

@TheFleegleHasLanded

I am clearly failing as a woman today, having neither acrylic nails nor a ponytail. I am wearing a bra as I am more comfortable wearing one, but other than that I am beginning to wonder if I am a man? All the signs are there; short hair, trousers, comfortable shoes.....
What relevance does that have to this incident?
justanotherneighinparadise · 16/06/2021 21:14

Oh my goodness. That story! 🙈

AdHominemNonSequitur · 16/06/2021 21:16

I honestly think that this is is a rare case of actual/overt transphobia. The misgendering (beyond the first time and being corrected) was clearly done in a way calculated to hurt.

I interpret the ruling in the same way Arbadacarba.

Arbadacarba · 16/06/2021 21:17

@Babdoc

How far does this go? If I insist I identify as an Empress, and demand to be addressed as “Your imperial majesty” and be curtseyed to, are train staff obliged to humour me with that as well? And if not, why not? What’s the difference?
If Northern Rail are similar to other customer-facing organisations, they will honour social titles and their associated styles of address.
KimikosNightmare · 16/06/2021 21:20

@kowari

Would a natal woman make a fuss and continuously correct a person missexing her if it wasn't relevant to the conversation? I know I wouldn't. I've not insisted that I not be called a lady even though I hate it.
Eden wasn't asking to be called a lady so your point is irrelevant.

I doubt I would ever be mistaken for a man although as men and women age the difference in facial features and proportions can change making some women look ambiguously masculine. If that were to happen to me, that in itself would be distressing and being repeatedly called "he" if I'd pointed out the error would be upsetting. Not enough to run to the press but probably enough to complain to the company.

kowari · 16/06/2021 21:21

What relevance does that have to this incident?
Eden seems to think that a ponytail, fake nails and a bra indicate that someone is a woman. "I was literally standing in front of him with a ponytail, acrylic nails and a bra on - all the signs were there.”

DelilahDingleberry · 16/06/2021 21:23

Also really, really curious at the argument that natal women wouldn’t make a fuss. On the feminism board. Not making a fuss is not a good thing!

KimikosNightmare · 16/06/2021 21:24

@kowari

What relevance does that have to this incident? Eden seems to think that a ponytail, fake nails and a bra indicate that someone is a woman. "I was literally standing in front of him with a ponytail, acrylic nails and a bra on - all the signs were there.”
You are taking her comment out of context and twisting it to suit your own agenda.
DdraigGoch · 16/06/2021 21:25

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Eden tried to compel the train staff to tell a lie?

They may have been rude, but they were also right, and if you are focusing on something else it makes it even harder to do a Stroop test correctly.

The inspector could have avoided anything gendered once it became apparent that it was a problem. "This customer has a problem with their ticket" might sound a bit impersonal but you can't be accused of anything. When you've got a difficult customer you've got to be very careful to keep to the high ground and bite your tongue. I had to yesterday when a lying, thieving scrote started making threats at me at work - I'd have dearly liked to have thrown him down the nearest set of stairs but instead had to just let it wash over me.
kowari · 16/06/2021 21:26

Eden wasn't asking to be called a lady so your point is irrelevant.
I disagree. Eden was asking not to be called Sir as they didn't like it. I hate being called a lady but I don't make a fuss whenever someone calls me one.

kowari · 16/06/2021 21:31

You are taking her comment out of context and twisting it to suit your own agenda.
I'm not deliberately twisting anything. What did the comment mean then? I have a barber cut and don't wear make up. I am in my DS's hand me down jeans. I don't get called Sir despite all the 'signs being there'.

KimikosNightmare · 16/06/2021 21:40

@kowari

Eden wasn't asking to be called a lady so your point is irrelevant. I disagree. Eden was asking not to be called Sir as they didn't like it. I hate being called a lady but I don't make a fuss whenever someone calls me one.
The comparator in this situation would be "ma'am" or "madam". If the employee had said "lady" to your face that actually would be very rude. If the employee were referring to Eden in the 3rd person "lady" is fine. Obviously it wouldn't be fine for you but the determination of some posters on here to take exception to the use of "lady" or "gentleman" in this sort of situation should never be underestimated.

And aside from that your point is still irrelevant. You might not like hearing "the lady here has a problem" but it's not mis- sexing or misgendering you. The direct comparator would be to say of you "the gentleman here has a problem"

Arbadacarba · 16/06/2021 21:41

@kowari

You are taking her comment out of context and twisting it to suit your own agenda. I'm not deliberately twisting anything. What did the comment mean then? I have a barber cut and don't wear make up. I am in my DS's hand me down jeans. I don't get called Sir despite all the 'signs being there'.
As I said earlier, whether you like it or not, whether it's a good thing or not, in recent history (by which I mean from the 20th Century onwards) false nails and long hair have been associated with female fashion, not male fashion. Go back another hundred years or so and it would be the other way round, go forward a hundred years and they might be equally associated with both sexes, but at this present moment in time, false nails and long hair are associated more with women and female-identifying people, than they are with male and male-identifying people.

Acknowledging that fact is not the same as saying all women have long hair and false nails, or all women should have long hair and false nails, or absolutely no males/male-identifying people have long hair and false nails.

It's simply saying that having long hair and false nails in 2021 makes you more likely to be female or female-identifying.

To deny this is disingenuous.

kowari · 16/06/2021 21:44

You might not like hearing "the lady here has a problem" but it's not mis- sexing or misgendering you.
It does make me feel misgendered actually. I do not present as a lady at all, it feels like a feminine term. I would have no objection to woman as that is just referring to my sex

DelilahDingleberry · 16/06/2021 21:46

Surely you can acknowledge that it’s far, far more common to see a woman with short hair, no makeup in “men’s” clothes but uses female pronouns than it would be to see a man in “womens clothes”, with a ponytail, acrylic nails and a bra who wants to be referred to as a man?