The look at me of pronouns

[Ritascornershop]

Recently I’ve had two interactions that have startled me. One was with legal aid (I’m in Canada) where the young lawyer rang me and said “Hello this is Thomas from xx, my practice is x and my pronouns are he/him.” Just in case I thought someone with a male voice and whose name was Thomas might like me, when speaking to him, to refer to him in the third person as she/her. I laughed and pointed out that as I was speaking directly to him, his pronouns wouldn’t be relevant.

The other interaction was after I’d written my member of parliament’s office asking for an answer on something I couldn’t get a Ministry to answer me on. 3 months later I finally got a reply suggesting I contact that Ministry 🙄 and signing off “Benjamin Lastname, he/him, Useless Twat, Your MP’s office”.

I replied telling him it was useless information that should not have taken 3 months to cough up, and I didn’t care what his pronouns were and I wasn’t going to proffer mine as doing so for women tended to increase sexism in professional interactions.

Is this as rampant in the UK? It just seems so unprofessional and so “look at me!” I’ve no interest in how they hope people refer to them when they’re not there, I just want answers to my questions that they are qualified to provide.

I'm in my late 30s. Worked for the same trust/dept for 13 years. Our HR dept announced the pronoun policy at the beginning of the year that it was heavily encouraged to add them to your email signature. I refused (just didn't add them) because I don't see why it's relevant in the slightest to my job, also because I don't buy into gender stereotypes- being described as a "tomboy" my whole life would probably result in me being a he/him in this "brave" new world.... about 75% of the dept now has their pronouns on their emails.

We have had a large new influx of younger staff, all recent university leavers/ first true social media generation who all have banded together and decided that anyone in the dept who doesn't use pronouns in their email is clearly a bigot/ transphobe/ homophobe. I've had a colleague called a terf in my hearing because she refused pretty vocally.

It's one of the reasons I'm trying to leave. I feel like the inmates are running the asylum. It's definitely made me more GC and more vocal about it. I've only just started coming on Mumsnet but I finally feel like maybe I'm not the only one who feels the same way.

@Waitwhat23
Essentially you seem to be suggesting that everyone's pronouns should be non sexed. No she/her, no he/him but everyone should have non-binary pronouns in order that sex and/or gender is not involved at all.
Yes, exactly.
Do you do that in your own pronoun signature? As a pp has asked, if your pronouns are she/her, why have you chosen to do that?

I explained above why I include my preferred pronouns in my signature. As to why I don’t state ‘they/them’, even though I believe society would be better if we all used gender neutral pronouns - the fact is that we currently operate within a language where we’re all used to gendered pronouns, and I don’t think it would achieve much in isolation for me to ask to be called they/them. I am perfectly comfortable being referred to as she/her, and it would make it harder for people to refer to me if I asked them to use they/them instead (it doesn’t come easily or naturally to most of us to refer to individuals as they/them, simply because it’s not what we’re used to.) Obviously if another person asks to be referred to as they/them - regardless of whether that’s because they feel uncomfortable with gendered pronouns, or because they believe on principle and that we should move away from gendered pronouns - I will always do my best to refer to them in that way.

Report your colleagues. Watched them wail and cry when they get a call from HR - because they will have no resilience.

I have to say I find it difficult to believe that trans or non-binary people find it difficult to express their preferred pronouns unless half the rest of the workforce is doing it too. IME they’re not backward in coming forwards in asking, or even demanding, anything else to do with their special status even when that makes others uncomfortable (eg using toilets designated for the sex other than their own).

it would make it harder for people to refer to me if I asked them to use they/them instead (it doesn’t come easily or naturally to most of us to refer to individuals as they/them, simply because it’s not what we’re used to.)

I’m not used to being expected to refer to visibly male-sexed persons “she” or “her” and it certainly makes it harder for me to refer to them as such, yet here we are.

Always the women making the most accommodations, isn’t it?

@EarthSight
The problem with that is that by saying you are fostering a culture of inclusion, the logical next step for many would be to see those who refuse to include pronouns as being fostering a culture of exclusion . You may be the exception in this, but that is how many people see women who refuse to go along with this, and more pressure is put on women to do it. Why might that be, I wonder??Could it be that women are seen as easier to push around and that they are expected to conform to gender stereotypes? Stereotypes that you are promoting by using ideological pronouns in this way, instead of biology based ones. Stereotypes which say that if you are 'she', you are expected to conform more, to be more caring, to be more 'inclusive' to sacrifice yourself for others, to not be 'difficult' to be an accepting universal mother figure for absolutely everyone in society.

I do you hope you will be vocally sticking up for those women in your workplace.

I think it’s inherent in the email signature pronoun thing that you only need a certain proportion to do it to achieve the purpose - as long as, say, 20% of staff include their preferred pronouns that should be sufficient to make it comfortable for anyone to do it who needs/wants to.

I disagree that stating preferred pronouns reflects or encourages gender stereotypes.

I wouldn’t pressure someone into stating their pronouns, although if they said they thought it was pointless/stupid/promoting an ideology I would challenge them on that and seek to have a discussion about it.

“Challenge”? Who gives you the right to do this? Someone says ‘no thanks’ you say ‘fine’.

I don’t go to work to be challenged by people who leap to join in this without considering the natural consequences of their behaviour. Pronouns today, eliminate sex based security tomorrow.

@beastlyslumber
What's your view on why it could be okay?

It’s not that I think it would be ok, it’s just that I have reservations about endorsing a person being referred to using pronouns they don’t feel comfortable with (and of course we’re talking about a person who has not been found guilty yet). But on balance I can’t see any way around it without causing greater distress to the alleged victim.

Challenge”? Who gives you the right to do this? Someone says ‘no thanks’ you say ‘fine’.

I don’t go to work to be challenged by people who leap to join in this without considering the natural consequences of their behaviour. Pronouns today, eliminate sex based security tomorrow.

I think if they choose to tell me their reasons for not including their pronouns there’s nothing wrong with me responding with my views?

@Theeyeballsinthesky

And yet when I see pronouns in an email, I instantly feel that the person using them believes trans women are literal women with all that that entails ie the removal of women’s sex based rights, the removal of women only sports,being ok with trans women in prisons or refuges

Or that they haven’t beyond be kind

Now that may not of course be what that person wants to signal but that is how I feel when I see pronouns in emails

And so funnily enough I feel very much not “included”

This is how I feel too - pronouns can be very excluding.

I also cannot understand how it's remotely relevant to how I do my job.

I was told off yesterday by my sister in law, for not using they/them pronouns for her daughter.

I was talking to my niece about her recent birthday and my s-i-l was silently mouthing something to me, from across the table.
And I had no idea what she was actually saying to me. So I thought nothing of it and then later on during the afternoon, i was corrected again.

I just completely ignored her.

I'm not getting into any of that caper and I'm certainly not going to have my language policed by my s-i-l and niece.

Fuck that.

@Teaandcakeordeath83

I'm in my late 30s. Worked for the same trust/dept for 13 years. Our HR dept announced the pronoun policy at the beginning of the year that it was heavily encouraged to add them to your email signature. I refused (just didn't add them) because I don't see why it's relevant in the slightest to my job, also because I don't buy into gender stereotypes- being described as a "tomboy" my whole life would probably result in me being a he/him in this "brave" new world.... about 75% of the dept now has their pronouns on their emails.

We have had a large new influx of younger staff, all recent university leavers/ first true social media generation who all have banded together and decided that anyone in the dept who doesn't use pronouns in their email is clearly a bigot/ transphobe/ homophobe. I've had a colleague called a terf in my hearing because she refused pretty vocally.

It's one of the reasons I'm trying to leave. I feel like the inmates are running the asylum. It's definitely made me more GC and more vocal about it. I've only just started coming on Mumsnet but I finally feel like maybe I'm not the only one who feels the same way.

This is awful. Everyone should have the right NOT to express a view - how utterly sinister this seems.

Well - wait until the HR department is awash with young’uns making every wilder demands and complaints about every bloody thing. Expecting the business to work around them.

See productivity and staff satisfaction drop. Watch shareholders getting pissed off, and senior management team jumping ship. See the negative social media commentary from staff and outsiders alike because - people to think that they can say whatever they like because ‘I’m Meeeeeeee’.

Good luck to them.

Oh and they will get bitten on the bum. It happens time and time again - a company goes full ‘whatever’ and someone somewhere will realise that there are bullies, creeps and rather unpleasant people and practices doing whatever they please. Staff leave, whistleblow and shine a light on the company that was being hailed for having such wonderful practices.

'Challenge' is too close to the TRA cry of 'educate yourself' for me to feel comfortable with tbh. Myself and other posters have found that it's just not enough to say 'no, thank you' regarding pronouns. It is inevitably challenged and often gets a very negative response. I have no issue with respecting preferred pronouns (with some obvious exceptions) but there is a culture of mandating that people state their own pronouns - I am uncomfortable with this.

I also think it's really quite unrealistic to think that an entire language's rules will change in order to have non sexed pronouns.

Challenged and insulted. Hissing staff calling you wary names because you won’t play ball with them. Immature and bullying.

@KittenKong

Challenged and insulted. Hissing staff calling you wary names because you won’t play ball with them. Immature and bullying.

While shouting 'be kind' from the rooftops! The cognitive dissonance is staggering. I now see 'be kind' as a veiled threat - it's 'agree with us or we'll do our best to destroy you'.

‘Be kind’ folk are the mean girls of today.

And the shouty person (raincoat and summer) at the Scottish Parliament protest - tweets from them screaming ‘I hope you are put to death, etc’ to liz truss. Yuh, be kind my backside.

*summer - zimmer

@Helen8220

Because language is important @helen8220? Because being able to accurately name something is important? Especially for women. Do you think it's humane to make a victim of rape caller her rapist 'she' in court, when she can see with her own eyes, and has experienced the biology of her oppressor first hand in the most visceral way one could experience it?

If you do have she/her on your email signature, why? Why are you 'she/her'?

I completely agree that language is important, and that we need a way to refer to the category of people who have xx chromosomes (or were born with predominantly female biological characteristics but due to intersex variations do not have xx chromosomes). But why do we need a system of language that makes it difficult to talk about a person - in any context, whether or not their sex/gender is relevant to the matter in question - without referencing their sex/gender? People on this thread have suggested that reminding the person you’re emailing that you’re a woman by including female pronouns in your signature may increase the likelihood of being treated differently (less favourably), and doesn’t think apply to social interactions more generally? If you have to be reminded of a person’s sex/gender in order to refer to them at all, isn’t that likely to exacerbate the extent to which unconscious biases are brought to bear?

On the question of victims of sexual assault by perpetrators who prefer female pronouns, I honestly don’t know what the right thing is.

I state my preferred pronouns in my email signature simply because I understand, from listening to trans and non-binary people, that this makes it easier for them to do the same, which in turn makes their interactions easier and less stressful.

Fair enough @Helen8220 , but do you understand the ideology that underpins that?

If you say that you are she/her, what do you think that means about your identity, and what you are communicating to others about your identity?

I'm asking because some women are under the impression that all it means is that they have no issues with gender identity, or that they are simply biological females, but that isn't what it is at all. What it actually means is that you agree with a certain set of stereotypes of how how women are. You're agreeing to the fact that being a woman is mainly defined as an inner feeling one has, a sort of semi-spiritual concept.

Do you think that womenhood should be limited to and mainly defined as not being very good at maths, liking pink, having a fondness for babies, being submissive, not being ambitious, enjoying high-heels and doing the housework? That is has nothing to do with our biological reality, like the fact most women give birth, our reproductive system, the fact we're more vulnerable to sexual violence in particular?

Again, if you do, then your pronouns usage is at least in alignment with your beliefs. If you don't think your womanhood should be limited to those things, then I would give using ideological pronouns extra consideration.

@KittenKong

‘Be kind’ folk are the mean girls of today.

And the shouty person (raincoat and summer) at the Scottish Parliament protest - tweets from them screaming ‘I hope you are put to death, etc’ to liz truss. Yuh, be kind my backside.

Yep. I think that the BE KIND people are some of the most unempathic people. Some of them simply enjoy righteously and piously dictating to others.

@KittenKong

@Theeyeballsinthesky These days I think it's often a signal that someone's not politically interested or involved, that they're not the type to rock the boat, so when someone comes along and says 'this is what you should do to be inclusive and nice', they simply do it. There's no probing, no asking questions, no challenging. They just want an easy life.

You know when someone's post is too long and they write 'TLDR'? (too long didn't read)? For many, it's a case of 'THDT' (too hard didn't think).

@Helen8220

I disagree that stating preferred pronouns reflects or encourages gender stereotypes

Please elaborate on how ideological pronouns are not about gender stereotypes.

[quote Helen8220]@EarthSight
Do you think you are being inclusive to butch women who may be really tired of people now asking for their pronouns all the time, of being made to feel like they're not really women because people are questioning their pronouns in a way they clearly wouldn't do as often for other women who are gender conforming? Can you not see how insulting it would be for them that you wouldn't find it their preferred pronouns to be obvious?

I don’t think a person should be asked specifically for their pronouns, unless it’s in a context where everyone is being asked for their pronouns regardless of how they present. If I met a person who presented in a gender-neutral way and I needed to refer to them using third person pronouns, and they hadn’t indicated preferred pronouns, I would use the pronouns that reflected whatever I believed their biological sex to be. If I was really unsure of their sex I would probably just avoid using pronouns until I received a prompt from them or someone else who already knew them.[/quote]
Again, I have so many questions -

If I met a person who presented in a gender-neutral way

What is it to present in a gender neutral way?

If I was really unsure of their sex

To be unsure of someone's sex, that means that you must feel you are at times able to correctly sex someone. How is it possible to be even be unsure of someone's sex, if sex is all on a spectrum? Wouldn't it then be infinite different shades, where it's not possible to distinguish one from the other? Where there are no binaries?

I would challenge them on that and seek to have a discussion about it

Yes, how incredibly inclusive of you.

This is exactly the problem that women face. Would you be willing to have that little discussion with an employee in the presence of an employment lawyer?