I am embracing virtue signalling pronouns in emails

[MsFogi]

I have realised I have made too many assumptions about gender over the years. I had always assumed that Paul (name changed of course) in my company was a man simply on the basis of his appearance (well over 6 foot, well built, big beard, low voice that only someone with an Adam's apple and whose balls have dropped could have). Imagine my relief to find that I have not been misgendering him for over a decade because he has helpfully added his pronouns to his email auto signature - they are he/him/his. There is no company diktat to add pronouns on emails so clearly this is important to Paul or maybe he has been misgendered recently.

So, I thought I would ensure that Paul was not offended on a Teams meeting this afternoon and kicked off the meeting by asking everyone to note that Paul's pronouns are he/him/his and that given that he has stated these that everyone please be sensitive to ensuring that they use them. No one said anything so I think they all took it on board, no one misgendered Paul and I like to think that his move to include his pronouns at work has been embraced in my meeting. Maybe as a result others that attended the meeting will add theirs to their auto signatures too.

[AgnestaVipers]

@EmbarrassingHadrosaurus You make a very good point about the golden bridge. We cannot play the zero sum game the TRAs do.

[ErrolTheDragon]

I agree! (Although it has to be said that my dog often misgenders other dogs ... on the off-chance that procreation is possible.)

Nah, he's bisexual.

[LiesDoNotBecomeUs]

@ErrolTheDragon

Bodies do not come presorted by chromosomes or genitalia alone; we could sort them by belly-button type, after all. Their sorting by sex, then, reflects human purposes and interests – those having to do with human procreation. Although these might be crucial human purposes and interests, they are still human ones. To this extent, the primary division of populations into males and females, like the socialisation that creates men and women, is a human ‘construction’

Most dogs can 'sort humans by sex' (obviously they can also sort dogs by sex for their own procreative purposes).

If the people who come up with these wordy idiocies CBA to learn some basic science, perhaps they could at least borrow Occam's razor and stop trying to make things which are really quite simple and objective into complicated incomprehensibilities.

I agree! (Although it has to be said that my dog often misgenders other dogs ... on the off-chance that procreation is possible.)

[serendipitea]

@Tidyspy

@Kanaloa I have regular contact with a colleague in a partner organisation who actually is called Alex and doesn’t include title/pronouns or other clues to their sex or gender in any written communication. If we spoke on the phone I guess I’d know but that hasn’t happened. I can’t think of a reason why I’d need to know - why would I?

Yes I too have had to communicate with an Alex and I love that I had no idea if Alex was male or female, or young or old, or well dressed or more casual... it was great! For six months. Then we finally had a Teams meeting and it got resolved.

..
I am happy to use they/them if I don't know or care if the person is male or female, (or if NB) but I hate the appropriation of 'they' to signify a third gender. I would much prefer if these pro-pronoun people adopted an artificial pronoun then misusing 'they'.

[TheBiologyStupid]

@GoodThinkingMax

Has anyone read "The End of the World is Flat" by Simon edge?

yes!!! I laughed out loud at the novel and wished that Edge’s optimistic ending could also be ours.

Haven't read it yet but have the Kindle version (on sale at 99p) waiting for my holiday reading.

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@ErrolTheDragon

Announcing pronouns is ridiculous but scoring a point in this way isn't the way to challenge it.

Always useful to hear of other approaches, what's your recommendation?

None because it's not an issue. The firm I work with has never mentioned it; apparently it was discussed at the Diversity and Equality group and the decision was to leave it to individuals if they wanted to do anything.

I haven't been asked to declare my pronouns. Out of the deluge of e-mails which arrive in my inbox every day I can think of only 3 people (all external sender's) who have added them.

I don't like LinkedIn but I don't think any of the people I'm connected with state their pronouns.

[BellaAmorosa]

@BenCoopersSupportWren

I saw OP’s approach less as mocking and more akin to when, as a manager, you have to report on the latest CorporateBollocks in a team meeting. You know it’s bollocks, anyone with an ounce of critical thinking skill knows it’s bollocks but nevertheless, you have to put on your straightest face and update the team as though you fully endorse it. Even if someone within the team comes up to you afterwards and says “that was a load of bollocks, wasn’t it?” you resolutely stay on the party line. If you do it skilfully enough, no one would be able to say with absolute certainty whether you really do think it’s bollocks or whether you really do believe the corporate messaging.

And that’s what “preferred pronouns” amounts to, ultimately…a load of bollocks foisted on people on fairly spurious grounds (“oh it’s harmless” - no it’s not; “oh it doesn’t cost anything” - maybe not you, but others it does; “oh it’s just being kind” - there’s nothing kind about forcing people to lie; “oh it’s just how they see themselves” - good for them, but their perception is not always aligned with reality and other people aren’t compelled to be complicit in someone’s delusion). Too many people have bought into the misapprehension that being “misgendered” (correctly sexed) is a horrendous hate crime on a par with violence and domestic abuse. It simply is not. In the vast majority of cases it is not even an insult, because for most people, especially in the workplace, there is no value judgement being made about whether a colleague was born male or female. We’re repeatedly told that being trans is not a mental illness or a medical condition of any sort these days and that transpeople know they aren’t changing sex, so I’m struggling to see how any grievous psychic injury will be caused by colleagues continuing to use the pronouns which relate to someone’s sex.

I have my name instantly shortened by roughly 25% of new people I meet or who email me at work despite me using the full version, and I have it misheard and misused on the phone another 25% of the time, including being addressed by the male version on occasion. It’s mildly irritating for about 0.5 seconds each time it happens, but hey, the world continues to turn.

🙌
It's been shown up for the ridiculousness that it is.

[EmbarrassingHadrosaurus]

@ErrolTheDragon

Announcing pronouns is ridiculous but scoring a point in this way isn't the way to challenge it.

Always useful to hear of other approaches, what's your recommendation?

I admit to being uncertain about this from Helen Joyce who highlights a comment about the removal of pronouns from a Twitter bio. (I decided against including a screenshot.)

I wonder if actions like that might deter some people from taking a golden bridge. In this case, the person is a prospective parliamentary candidate so in public life but it has the potential to deter other people?

twitter.com/HJoyceGender/status/1552319140802830337

We need to make it easy for people to cross the bridge and to rethink their previous perspectives. It's been so easy for people to have been mislead by #BeKind, forced teaming, and purposefully confusing language. This is not an area where people should be shamed. It's important that we welcome people back to material reality.

Yes, if people are in public life, I would like them to work to reverse any policies or erasures that they've introduced. If they've been super-influential, I would like some public acknowledgement and a pledge to make appropriate repairs and restoration, so to speak.

[IcakethereforeIam]

Actually, @TheLassWiADelicateAir I was thinking of you while I wrote that post. I sincerely believe your concern was for Paul, so I was careful with my wording. Apologies if I gave you the impression to the contrary.

[BenCoopersSupportWren]

I saw OP’s approach less as mocking and more akin to when, as a manager, you have to report on the latest CorporateBollocks in a team meeting. You know it’s bollocks, anyone with an ounce of critical thinking skill knows it’s bollocks but nevertheless, you have to put on your straightest face and update the team as though you fully endorse it. Even if someone within the team comes up to you afterwards and says “that was a load of bollocks, wasn’t it?” you resolutely stay on the party line. If you do it skilfully enough, no one would be able to say with absolute certainty whether you really do think it’s bollocks or whether you really do believe the corporate messaging.

And that’s what “preferred pronouns” amounts to, ultimately…a load of bollocks foisted on people on fairly spurious grounds (“oh it’s harmless” - no it’s not; “oh it doesn’t cost anything” - maybe not you, but others it does; “oh it’s just being kind” - there’s nothing kind about forcing people to lie; “oh it’s just how they see themselves” - good for them, but their perception is not always aligned with reality and other people aren’t compelled to be complicit in someone’s delusion). Too many people have bought into the misapprehension that being “misgendered” (correctly sexed) is a horrendous hate crime on a par with violence and domestic abuse. It simply is not. In the vast majority of cases it is not even an insult, because for most people, especially in the workplace, there is no value judgement being made about whether a colleague was born male or female. We’re repeatedly told that being trans is not a mental illness or a medical condition of any sort these days and that transpeople know they aren’t changing sex, so I’m struggling to see how any grievous psychic injury will be caused by colleagues continuing to use the pronouns which relate to someone’s sex.

I have my name instantly shortened by roughly 25% of new people I meet or who email me at work despite me using the full version, and I have it misheard and misused on the phone another 25% of the time, including being addressed by the male version on occasion. It’s mildly irritating for about 0.5 seconds each time it happens, but hey, the world continues to turn.

[OldCrone]

Oh, I can assure you my problem with this is the mocking of an employee in front of other employees.

Why do you think this is mocking him? If Paul had declared his pronouns as she/her, should she have ignored this and allowed everyone else to misgender Paul, or should she have announced it at the meeting? Why is it different if the pronouns are the obvious ones? Isn't it 'othering' of those with a different gender to only announce those whose pronouns don't obviously match their sex?

[ErrolTheDragon]

Announcing pronouns is ridiculous but scoring a point in this way isn't the way to challenge it.

Always useful to hear of other approaches, what's your recommendation?

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@IcakethereforeIam

D'you know I think the problem some poster have with OP is not that she mocked Paul, but she mocked the pronouns and through them the whole ideology. Even gentle teasing cannot be tolerated. That she apparently successfully and subtly showed it up, got away with it, then boasted about it on MN...well...literal violence!

Oh, I can assure you my problem with this is the mocking of an employee in front of other employees.

Announcing pronouns is ridiculous but scoring a point in this way isn't the way to challenge it.

[pylonpal]

Look, I have found that people are quite able to tell colleagues that they are dyslexic, autistic or trans without their peers having previously announced their non-dyslexic/ non-autistic/ non-trans status.
Its really not about making it easy for trans people. It’s about announcing, at work, to your allegiance to a controversial political movement. And THAT is unprofessional.

[GoodThinkingMax]

Has anyone read "The End of the World is Flat" by Simon edge?

yes!!! I laughed out loud at the novel and wished that Edge’s optimistic ending could also be ours.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

Icake yes we are required to Take It Seriously At All Times, even when merely discussing it on an anonymous talkboard.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

How would that even work though?!

Perfectly easily, as a pp demonstrated.

[IcakethereforeIam]

D'you know I think the problem some poster have with OP is not that she mocked Paul, but she mocked the pronouns and through them the whole ideology. Even gentle teasing cannot be tolerated. That she apparently successfully and subtly showed it up, got away with it, then boasted about it on MN...well...literal violence!

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@ErrolTheDragon

While it's entirely normal to use pronouns in those situations, there's always ways to avoid them if you're unsure.

That is the argument usually made on here.

Oddly I find that when I'm writing that I'm noticing pronouns more and am now substituting names for pronouns. I'd never noticed it before but all this pronouns talk has made me think about it. There are many occasions where names are clearer and just read better than pronouns

[Tidyspy]

@Kanaloa I have regular contact with a colleague in a partner organisation who actually is called Alex and doesn’t include title/pronouns or other clues to their sex or gender in any written communication. If we spoke on the phone I guess I’d know but that hasn’t happened. I can’t think of a reason why I’d need to know - why would I?

[ErrolTheDragon]

While it's entirely normal to use pronouns in those situations, there's always ways to avoid them if you're unsure.

[EmbarrassingHadrosaurus]

No you don't. ",I agree with Paul' you wouldn't say "I agree with him"

It's sometimes necessary to develop a point over several sentences.

"I agree with Paul's referral to our terms of reference. He makes the point in his report from Dec '21 that…"

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@OldCrone

No one would refer to Paul as 'he" in a Teams meeting.

Wouldn't they? You do sometimes refer to someone present in the third person when talking to the whole group.

No you don't. ",I agree with Paul' you wouldn't say "I agree with him"

It's the "cat's mother" rule.

[OldCrone]

No one would refer to Paul as 'he" in a Teams meeting.

Wouldn't they? You do sometimes refer to someone present in the third person when talking to the whole group.

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@OldCrone

If Paul had declared that his pronouns were she/her, would it have been the right thing to do to announce that at the meeting? People who knew what he looked like and were aware that Paul is normally a male name would not expect his pronouns to be she/her, so he would have been misgendered by just about everyone if they were not announced.

The reason usually given for people like Paul (he/him) stating their pronouns is so that such a practice becomes normal for everyone, so that when someone like Paul (she/her) states their pronouns it doesn't stand out. If it is the right thing to do to announce at a meeting that Paul is she/her, is it not also the right thing to do to announce the other Paul as he/him if he has also put his pronouns in his email signature? Or should all pronouns in signatures be ignored, which would mean that Paul (she/her) is likely to be repeatedly misgendered?

One of the best arguments against pronouns is that they are not needed at a face to face meeting. That's often said on here. I agree.


I think anouncing pronouns/ adding them to your email is a load of nonsense.

No one would refer to Paul as 'he" in a Teams meeting. There was no need for OP to announce Paul's pronouns, so despite thinking announcing pronouns is nonsense I'm not going to cheer lead for the OP.