Pronoun badges for train staff and mis-gendering passengers

[CervixSampler]

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.

Really? That's bizarre.

Were they in the sports pages?

Some of the results were about trans athletes controversy, so quite possibly.

If the point you're making is that a typical 50 year old man in a customer service role is likely to live in a narrow world revolving around football, a. I think this stereotype is incorrect and ageist and b. even if it were true, it still wouldn't excuse repeatedly calling someone by a term they'd explicitly requested wasn't used.

As has been already pointed out on the thread, if the station staff had an ideological reason for not using Eden's preferred pronouns, they could easily have avoided this by addressing her as 'Eden' and referring to her as 'this customer' or similar.

How is the guard supposed to know this? Many people don't know much about gender ideology and trans people's expectations of others. Probably because they have no interest in it.

@Erikrie

As has been already pointed out on the thread, if the station staff had an ideological reason for not using Eden's preferred pronouns, they could easily have avoided this by addressing her as 'Eden' and referring to her as 'this customer' or similar.

How is the guard supposed to know this? Many people don't know much about gender ideology and trans people's expectations of others. Probably because they have no interest in it.

What prevented them stopping calling her "sir"?when she asked them not to?

From the information given it does sound like the train staff member was being goady, the man, woman, whatever comment kind of confirms it.
However, it does throw up the problem with gender ideology followers being disappointed when their needs aren't met for various reasons.
I am thinking of someone like my Grandad. Lovely man, quite death. So much do he thinks ds has a different name similar to his actual name. Not very versed in pc language and his multicultural neighbours indulge him in that, they accept language that would be a slut from someone else because they know he doesn't mean anything by it and would struggle to listen to a correcting conversation.
I can easily see him antagonise someone because he has no concept of gender ideology, doesn't know about pronouns and is very apt to repeating himself when he's struggling to hear and keep up.
I'm not saying that is the case here, but I do think people need to manage their expectations a bit. Developing resilience is always a good idea.

Dear not death.
Semi literate as well so really does only read the sun sports section.

Deaf for god's sake autocorrect!

If the station staff glanced quickly but heard a male voice from the person in front of them, it's entirely understandable they'd say "sir". Once a passenger has requested not to be called "sir", good customer service would be to move on and drop any direct references as calling the customer "you" could suffice. If the member of staff needed to speak about a customer to a colleague, they could easily refer to "the customer".

To keep pushing "sir" after being told not to say "sir" is needlessly rude.

What prevented them stopping calling her "sir"?when she asked them not to?

Maybe this answers it from Eden themselves:

He just looked me up and down and tutted and looked at his colleagues as if he couldn’t understand the point I was trying to make

Maybe, they didn't actually understand the point Eden was trying to make because they didn't recognise them as identifying as female. Because, like much of the population, they don't follow twitter, Mumsnet, social media, and do not realise that there is now a perceived expectation to use pronouns that don't match what someone sees in front of them.

To keep pushing "sir" after being told not to say "sir" is needlessly rude.

And this - if it happened in this way - is what I have a problem with.

Gobby youths or drunks? Perhaps. Still wrong. Still unacceptable.

Someone in a very public front facing job?

No.

I would wish to hear their side.

As has been already pointed out on the thread, if the station staff had an ideological reason for not using Eden's preferred pronouns, they could easily have avoided this by addressing her as 'Eden' and referring to her as 'this customer' or similar.

There was no need to go on and on using a form of address that was clearly unwelcome/offensive/upsetting.

I hope I’m wrong, but I suspect that when Northern Rail have completed their investigation they’ll be telling their staff to use whatever ‘inclusive’ language the customer wants, that they don’t have the option to dissociate themselves from the customer’s fantasy.

Staff might well find that unwelcome/offensive/upsetting.

Why can a transgender customer insist that a staff member has to lie and deny reality, in order to “validate” their belief, but the staff member apparently can’t insist that their own preference for truth and reality be respected? Why does “be nice” always just go one way?
Humans cannot change sex. Ticket staff should not be forced to pretend that they can.

SheldonesqueTheBstard
Exactly. Whatever people's individual views on pronouns/misgendering/gender ideology, if customer asks not to be called something, don't call them it.
Removing "sir" from a sentence isn't a big issue and continuing to say sir (especially if it happened as the article says) is poor customer relations.

I suspect the same.

Their staff might well find it upsetting, unsettling, offensive and unwelcome.

Their feelings probably won’t count though. And they probably won’t be able to put their account of it into the public domain.

How is that fair?

Consideration works both ways.

And perhaps they struggled with ‘the experience’ of it all.

A bra, nails and hair does not necessarily a woman make.

My nails are stumps after a work incident the other night. My hair falls out with stress and so I have bald spots. And today I am going unfettered as I’m not stepping outside the house again.

Still a woman though.

Babdoc
Removing the word "sir" isn't forcing the member of staff to lie or validate. The member of staff could have continued that conversation without any reference to the customer's actual or perceived sex or gender identity.

We will never know if they did exactly what you suggested because they probably will not be allowed to comment.

Just one side of the story here.

“I think he was training the other worker because everything I was saying, he was relaying it back and explaining all while calling me ‘he’ and ‘sir’.
“I kept correcting him by saying it’s ‘miss’ or ‘she’ but by the fifth time, it really started to annoy me. I shouted ‘oh my god, it’s she’.
“He just looked me up and down and tutted and looked at his colleagues as if he couldn’t understand the point I was trying to make.

So fare dodger is referred to staff member who is simultaneously explaining the situation to trainee. Staff refers to fare dodger as Sir, perceiving them to be male.
(Correctly, as it happens)

Fare dodger keeps interrupting staff member as he tries both to deal with fare dodger and instruct trainee by saying “It’s SHE” and staff member hasn’t a bloody clue what the fare dodger is on about.

So fare dodger goes to the papers. Because that’s a proportionate response

Eden is pissed off at being perceived as male and is having a strop. Sorry, Eden, you can’t control how others perceive you. Grow up.

Can we extend this further? Can we insist that someone doesn't call us "you"?

NecessaryScene
I think names and name substitutes are different to removing the unisex second person pronoun you from conversation when there's nothing else that does that job.

Eden might be someone who could start an argument in an empty room, but if the member of staff repeatedly said "sir" instead of removing any form of address then they'd have avoided an entirely avoidable situation, and the almost inevitable going to the press situation.