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.

[GoodJanetBadJanet]

But it does make a difference to you, because it makes a difference to all women. You just have copped it yet.
In your opinion it does, not mine.

[Emotionalsupportviper]

@TheKeatingFive

Sarah says Sarah will be late in tomorrow so Sarah might be starting Sarah's work a little bit later tomorrow

Sarah will be delayed tomorrow so may be starting work a bit later.

Doesn't sound too problematic to me.

And even if it was as clumsy as all get-out, I would rather use names than authenticate a lie and allow someone to compel my speech.

You need pronouns (oops, see, one just slipped in there saying you!) - it's THIRD PERSON PRONOUNS that are affected @GoodJanetBadJanet .

The ones you use when talking ABOUT somebody, not to them.

When someone is talking about me, I couldn't give a damn what pronouns they use (and unless it's a lie which is detrimental to my reputation I don't care what they say, either - as someone once said "What other people think of you is none of your business").

I can't see how using "preferred pronouns" (when they don't align with sex) is damaging to anyone. They aren't there to hear it, for a start!

However they are VERY damaging to the people who insist on using "she/her" for a man and "he/him" for a woman or "they/them" for a non-binary/binary - and don't even get me started on the "unique" ones!

They set up cognitive dissonance which damages critical (in the true sense) thought - whether you realise it or not. You also have to constantly police your own speech and that of others - and constantly compel your own speech and that of others - or try to. Personally, I am not in the business of compelling anyone else's speech/thought, and I don't expect them to try to compel mine.

[midgetastic]

It costs me nothing

Therefore

It costs nobody


Logic fail

[TheKeatingFive]

Logic fail

I wonder is it more that they just don't care? The vulnerable women it ultimately impacts just aren't very important to them. And they like the woke points.

[Tryingtokeepgoing]

@LK1972

@Tryingtokeepgoing I think your position is that pronouns in emails 'can do something with little effort, and zero cost or impact to make someone else’s life better', and all those women who disagree are making fuss about nothing? Is that correct?

No not at all, that’s not what I said at all. The OPs approach is the classic bully’s approach… saying something she intends to be belittling/demeaning/whatever, but in such a way that when she’s called on it she can pretend she was actually on Paul’s side. We know she wasn’t doing it support Paul. We know Paul probably didn’t want support. But we can also infer he might have been doing it to support others. We don’t know, and neither does she, if anyone else in the meeting or in the business might want support, and if they do then the OPs approach is likely not to make them feel supported. By all means have a debate / discussion about the use of pronouns and gender, but doing it in that way in a meeting just seems unnecessarily mean to me.

[IcakethereforeIam]

I think people who see the OP's action as mean, want it to be mean. Though in honesty I have to admit it works the other way round too. I see it as AOB or gentle teasing at worst. Fuck knows what Paul thought, he's probably already forgotten about it.

[TheLassWiADelicateAir]

@IcakethereforeIam

I think people who see the OP's action as mean, want it to be mean. Though in honesty I have to admit it works the other way round too. I see it as AOB or gentle teasing at worst. Fuck knows what Paul thought, he's probably already forgotten about it.

The OP did this to score a point. It was completely unnecessary in the context of a Teams meeting-the wide eyed talking about being "suuprtive" is disingenuous.

I think declaring your pronouns is a load of nonsense but regardless of that, if I were the OP's employer I would not be impressed if I'd been at the meeting.

[IcakethereforeIam]

I can't disagree with you. I just don't think it's that big a deal, were it not for the wider society totally losing its shit over gender. A bit of gentle ribbing is often part of team cultures. Can you honestly say the reaction of some of the posters on here isn't also to score a point? Check out the hyperbole at the start of the thread.

[OldCrone]

@Tryingtokeepgoing

No not at all, that’s not what I said at all. The OPs approach is the classic bully’s approach… saying something she intends to be belittling/demeaning/whatever, but in such a way that when she’s called on it she can pretend she was actually on Paul’s side. We know she wasn’t doing it support Paul. We know Paul probably didn’t want support. But we can also infer he might have been doing it to support others. We don’t know, and neither does she, if anyone else in the meeting or in the business might want support, and if they do then the OPs approach is likely not to make them feel supported. By all means have a debate / discussion about the use of pronouns and gender, but doing it in that way in a meeting just seems unnecessarily mean to me.

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?

[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.

[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

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.

[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…"

[ErrolTheDragon]

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

[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?

[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

[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!

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

How would that even work though?!

Perfectly easily, as a pp demonstrated.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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?

[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.