Missive from a London local authority to its employees

[NeeshyOne]

We are all aware of how damaging it can be for individuals to be misgendered. Misgendering can damage someone’s self-confidence as well as having an impact on an individual’s mental health.
Getting someone’s pronoun right promotes inclusivity and helps all people feel seen and recognised.
As part of our council wide drive to equality we have been considering how we can best minute our formal meetings.

We will review this to see how its working but we will try to apply the right pronouns and when we are not aware of this will either use neutral pronouns, job titles or full names. We will not assume pronouns from appearance.

Lots of us have started to sign off our emails with our pronouns and wear badges which is obviously helpful. However this is not universal and a matter of personal choice. I would however be grateful if you could drop me a note letting me know your pronouns. We will hold this data securely and for this purpose only. This is obviously not compulsory but as explained without this we will use neutral terms, jobs titles or full names. Which we choose will sometimes depend on the grammar (clarity remains a primary driver for us) but we will look to ensure we properly reflect in particular contributions by women.

I attach a guide (from Stonewall) to pronouns generally and changing your email signatures.

END

I work with this LA, not for them. But I am seriously pissed off with it, especially the continued use of Stonewall as some sort of benchmark for best practice, rather than a politicised lobbying group pushing an ideology. Is there any point in challenging it? How?

There is a throwaway mention of it being 'a matter of choice' which suggests they are aware they're in danger of trampling right to belief and showing their prejudices, but I would be pointing out the chilling effect and pressuring effect of requiring this, and that all beliefs are equal before the law.

And that at this point openly following Stonewall's advice is taking a rather large risk.

We are all aware of how damaging it can be for individuals to be misgendered.

Are we?

I’m so pleased that the LA in question seems to have managed to complete all its outstanding work relating to issues like digital exclusion, CQC improvements, Ofsted, housing overcrowding, and so on and so on. It’s great to hear of a LA that has run out of serious and urgent issues to address, which is presumably why they are diverting resource to the rather less pressing issue of pronouns in internal meetings.

I do hope the LA will be sharing its secrets of success with the Local Government Association and DLUHC, so that all other councils in the country can make sure they’re just as effective and efficient at service delivery and meeting resident and business need.

And then, when everyone involved in local authority work in the country has run out of urgent things to do, they’ll be able to memorise everyone’s individual pronouns.

Absolutely this

How is it helpful?

Is there any evidence to back this up?

Is there a market for pronoun bumper stickers I could get in on?

We are all aware of how damaging it can be for individuals to be misgendered.

So many horror stories, to channel another thread...

Use names them and remove pronouns altogether?

I don't actually care if I were called he. It doesn't change who or what I am.

It is significant that an email that is supposedly to assist some people now carries coercive pressure for other people.

This is a mess. It has been poorly handled from the start. Tantrums and emotional outpourings should never have been allowed to be converted into people fearing losing their jobs over misgendering. The blame is not solely Stonewall’s but they have certainly largely contributed to it.

What they seem to be saying is that if you don’t comply and supply your pronouns you’ll be referred to henceforth as they. Banking on women being so irritated by this - for one thing, people might assume you to be a navel gazing non binary bore if you have they pronouns - that they will then supply the correct pronouns if she/her. Then they’re on your file and you’re seen to be complying and colluding with the nonsense.

Essentially, either comply or we will deliberately apply the wrong pronouns when speaking about you, potentially leading people to assume you are non binary which will lead to further assumptions about the kind of person they’re dealing with.

Appalling and needs to be challenged.

Hmm. I’ve just had a Google to see if there was any local authority in the country that had zero homelessness, zero childhood obesity, zero youth crime, and had reported having achieved full equality for disabled residents and workers, no gender pay gap, and so on. That would have satisfied my curiosity about which council could be prioritising pronouns.

But apparently - and I’m sure this will come as a total shock to everyone - there isn’t one. So it wouldn’t be unreasonable to think that the local authority in the OP might have something its staff could be doing other than recording pronouns.

They get everyone to declare their pronouns and can then tick a box to say 99% or whatever of staff are pronoun compliant and in agreement. I would deliberately ignore and let them use my name.

Deeply perplexed by this - does no one have any brains there?

The easy way - which many organisations do - to avoid any of this is to use initials throughout - Names of those in attendance at beginning with (xx) initials in brackets after.

Would avoid offending everyone - instead of which t hey have chosen to offend women!!

we will look to ensure we properly reflect in particular contributions by women.

!!

Not just that- they can tick a box that says they are supporting trans/non binary staff and get the inclusivity points that show them in a good light.

like work places putting up inspirational posters and ticking a “supporting mental health” box. It’s all bullshit.

Every single LA is going to have a massive budget cut.
And yet they are wasting time on shit like this. The public will not be happy. They need to remember who they serve.

Is there any point in challenging it? How?
"Thank you for your communication regarding misgendering. As I am sure you are aware, following the Forstater ruling, Gender Identity is considered a belief system. I do not subscribe to this belief system so this communication does not apply to me.
Please continue to use my sex-based pronouns. And please ensure that they are recorded as sex-based and not gender-based.
Kind regards, NeeshyOne."

God I'm so sick of this bollocks.

I want sanity to return.

We are all aware of how damaging it can be for individuals to be misgendered.

Crikey, do they provide smelling salts at this LA? Let's hope none of the delicate flowers work in social services or have to have contact with a member of the public who's even mildly irate.

Seeing as we're allowed to compel other people's speech nowadays I think the best thing is to opt out of pronouns completely and insist always being referred to by name.

Meeting minutes:
Jacqueline raised an issue with the latest data file whereby Jacqueline was unable access it. Jacqueline raised an IT ticket however Jacqueline needed a response before the end of the SLA so Jacqueline escalated the issue. IT provided Jacqueline with the file and Jacqueline will now review...

It's damaging if you're sexist.

My kids are misgendered constantly but I'm teaching them not to be sexist so it's never a problem. Much of the time they don't bother to correct strangers.

No way I'm going to turn around now and say actually kids, we were wrong, it's damaging. The world needs less sexist people, not more.

Trans ideology really does require everyone to adhere to strict gender stereotypes to work.

Take two:
"Thank you for your communication regarding misgendering. In your eagerness to be inclusive of those who subscribe to the Gender Identity belief system, you seem to have overlooked those who have a different belief system. I am sure that you would not try to impose the same religious belief on all your staff so I am at a loss as to why you are trying to impose GI on all staff. You have described the system as "not compulsory" so I would be grateful if you would actually mean this, and allow an opt-out.

Please continue to use my sex-based pronouns. And please ensure that they are recorded as sex-based and not gender-based.
Kind regards, NeeshyOne."

Who TF uses pronouns in formal minutes anyway?

LaviniasBigBloomers (LBB) stated the project to erase women's rights from the face of the planet was largely on track, but warned that those pesky MNers continued to be active. The risk register will be updated accordingly.

Pronoun free zone, innit?

@NeeshyOne
As well as mentioning Forstater, you could also point out that only 0.2-0.3% of the population of England and Wales considers themselves to have a gender identity at all. It's the belief system of a miniscule minority. Are they going to change their systems to take account of all the religions and belief systems in the country, as well as nonbelievers? Will people be encouraged to sign emails with allahukbar, or to wear crosses? Perhaps suggest that they can leave it to individuals to record/request pronouns and leave it up to other employees whether they comply. as that is fairer to all.

I'm confused - they want pronouns so that they can be included in the formal minutes of meetings - I've never seen or heard of any minutes that don't just refer to the participants by their name and job title at the start, and then by their initials in the actual minutes. Then they say "We will hold this data securely and for this purpose only." - so, only for use in the minutes of meetings? but then there is a load of guff about pronouns according to Stonewall, and lots of 'it's not compulsory, but let us know your pronouns anyway.'

Did a grown up compose that email?

Maybe ask a few questions, e.g:

Thank you for your communication. I assume you are aware of the Forstater ruling?

In the light of the Forstater ruling, can you please explain how you propose to protect partners and members of staff who do not have a gender identity?

Can partners and staff who do not subscribe to gender identity beliefs request that their pronouns are recorded as being sex based?

Can you also reassure partners and staff that any request to record their pronouns as sex based will be treated without prejudice?

Etc