Declining to put my preferred pronouns in my email signature

[HowDoIGetThisThingOff]

It's finally happened, I've been "told" to put my preferred pronouns in my email signature at work.

I've emailed back saying my preference is that I don't do this. But I'm feeling a bit anxious 😬.

Please can I get some advice on what to say if they come back with questions or pressure to comply?

Not RTFT but I noticed a woman at work had included Ka / Ren as her pronouns which made me giggle.

@FlirtsWithRhinos your post inspired what I'm contemplating putting a link to in my e-mail signature to so that people are taken to a word document to read "why I don't state pronouns". I don't think I'm brave enough to do it yet though!

This is what I've written. It's nowhere near as punchy as your version as I'm scared my workplace isn't ready for me to state my beliefs.

"She/her/hers are third person pronouns used to describe women and girls in English.

Currently, there are two conflicting definitions of the word “woman” (and “man”, but I will focus primarily on the word “woman”).

1. There is the sex-based definition; an adult, human female. A definition rooted in biological fact and an inescapable part of someone’s biological make-up, including genetic eye colour, hair colour and skin colour.
2. There is the mind-based definition; a person who feels female.

Personally, I have never “felt” female. I have no idea what it means to feel female, only to exist in a female body. I do not personally believe that it is possible to “feel” female or male, and those who think that they do, do so by way of accepting traditional gender stereotypes which feminism has been working hard to erase for a long time. By accepting the second definition, I would be in direct conflict of my feminist beliefs.

By declaring my pronouns, I would be signalling to others I am following a different belief system to my own (in the same way I wouldn’t wear a cross necklace, lest others believe I was a Christian).

These beliefs are often seen as hateful towards trans people. Women and men who believe in sex-based definitions of women are labelled “Trans exclusive Radical Feminism” (TERF) and, in return those showing these beliefs are often in receipt of hate themselves.

I am happy to accept that other people have different beliefs to the above in the same way my atheism allows me to work alongside, accept and respect those who follow a religion. I will work alongside colleagues who identify as trans or non-binary with acceptance and respect (including using their own chosen pronouns), and hope they respectfully accept my beliefs too."

@Bornin1989

I haven't used this at work yet, I meant it's an explanation I've given here a few times. The words change but the core is the same.

Honestly, if I were using my explanation at work I wouldn't put in my last paragraph because it's unnecessarily inflammatory. I'd hold it in reserve for a personal conversation if necessary.

Only you know your workplace, but on first reading I felt your explanation jumped too quickly to conflict/defense. It's like you are anticipating an argument that might not happen.

Personally I think it's enough to explain that currently Woman has two different meanings and that the meaning associated with declaring She/Her/Hers pronouns isn't something you feel you can honestly say applies to yourself. Then be prepared with the more detailed reasons around feminism if questions come up.

Or if you want to explicitly tie your position to your feminist beliefs upfront, maybe just drop paragraph 6? You know you are just trying to head off unfounded accusations of hate but the people you are trying to get through to will likely just read it as an admission.

I hope I haven't pulled the wind out of your sails! The thinking in your statement is not a waste, it is so important to get your thoughts properly in order. Just consider whether it's going to be effective to drop the whole TRA/GC debate in one go!

I really welcome the feedback, thank you!

I'm still not brave enough to use it but will adapt it anyway in case I ever do need it.

one/it should cover it - gender-neutral, indefinite pronoun which abstains from the whole gender carry on.

Could you say, "normal pronouns"?

You'd probably be hauled in for a disciplinary for suggesting your pronouns are normal and trans ones aren't.

What I would love to say is that I’ve been raped, had abortions, given birth to multiple children, and been sexually harassed at work, and been paid less than my male coworkers, and on none of these occasions have I been misgendered. So I’m confident people can figure it out for themselves.

On the point that people now know what a pronoun is, I wonder if anyone will start saying herself or himself.

You know - as in "myself and my friends went to the pub"

“My friends and I went to the pub”

"Me and me mates went down the pub."

I would just answer really dryly and boring, like "is it optional?" and if it isn't, "is there a policy that says it isn't?" Maybe you could out-DEI them and go "is it ethical to force people to disclose pronouns if they happen to not be comfortable making them public?"

Also one thing my friend has done is mention to her boss those studies about "sex priming", the things about how if women have to tick a box saying woman before they do a math test they do worse than if they don't have to disclose, because on some subconscious level they're aware that they're women proving the stereotype that women are bad at math. (works better if you're in a STEM field)

Yes, that's exactly the sort of thing I had in mind that the OP could use. There's quite a lot more of it, and - as the suggestions on this thread demonstrate - a lot of different was to approach the situation.

It leads me to the rhetorical question: just WHAT is it about this issue in particular that brings out the woke virtue signallers? Sadly, I suspect that #bekind and TWAW and 'trans rights are human rights' is just MRA in disguise (and a not terribly good disguise at that).

These problems have arisen because some people want to ignore fact and create an alternative reality for themselves. The pronoun range (him/his/her/hers, then they/them for groups) suits because it is based on fact.

Having to now flux when these words are used, whether new words are required, is because some people wish to completely ignore biological fact.

I am an atheist so don't partake in religious worship. This is acceptable today as it's recognised that people have the freedom whether to follow a religion or not in this country. There are unfortunately still countries out there where it's compulsory with very heavy penalties for non compliance.

2000 years ago, the Christians came along and took pagan festivals and rebranded them as Christian ones to make people worship their god instead of the previous ones. There were the odd tweaks but a lot of it stayed the same. With Easter, they didn't even bother to change the name. If you celebrated Saturnalia then you were told that you were celebrating Christmas now.

TRAs have used the same tactic with pronouns. Everyone used them and they meant the same to everyone but now the new religion has made them part of the worship. People carry on using pronouns as they have done forever but suddenly it's been hijacked and you are supposed to state them to signify that you are not a heretic. Not believing in the new religion is not an option, public shaming, shunning and violence are very real punishments for not complying. Not quite the burn in hell for all eternity but you get the idea.

I'd rather be identified by my sex (as it is a biological given) than gender. Gender is such an abstract concept. Some of my traits are more feminine, some are more masculine. I dress in a more gender-neutral way. But I am a woman. And I'm ok with that.

So very well put! It saddens me that all this armchair virtue-signalling does nothing more than provide an excuse to polish self-adorned halos, dragging the small minority of genuinely intersex / trans ppl amongst us into the inevitable backlash.

Religious, professional and societal status, cultural affiliations and gender are generally made evident through personal appearance and/ or letters before / after a name. I.E. when it matters, the preferred means of address is usually clear and Mrs, Dr, Sister, Father, Rabbi, Bhante, Imam, Commander, Your Grace… etc. used as appropriate. If the 2% trans or non-binary folk want to specify a preference in how they’re addressed, it’s their choice to do likewise, so why all the fuss? Surely we can respect this without demanding unnecessary announcements from the 98% majority* of non-trans humans.

On the/ rare occasions it’s unclear and (and necessary to know) can’t people just… ask?🤷🏼‍♀️

• Source: worldpopulationreview.coment…

I’d put he/him. That’d probably piss off a lot of people. I then point out to anyone who cares to ask that by addressing me as him/he I’m then more likely to get taken seriously, be paid more, and have people listen to me.

my sex (female) is a handicap for my career progression, pay, pension becuase of unconcious bias, I do NOT prejudice how people perceive me , by announcing I’m female unless I bloody have to.

I sign all letters/emails to people who don’t know me with just my initials and surname - and 99% they are replied to with title MrJoy …funny that ….

@Whiteroomjoy

+1

As I think I said on another pronoun thread once, if pronouns are a choice I'll take the ones with the power thanks.

I don't understand the issue here. What is wrong with pronouns, we all have them so what is the harm in including them?

Did you read the thread, jane?

Yes, I did and I still don't get the issue here. I am happy for people to refer to me as she/her and I don't understand why that's a shameful thing to make people aware of

Shameful? Weird. Maybe you should read the thread again if that's what you've concluded from it.

@AnarchoTyrannosaurus I just think it's rather immature to kick up such a big fuss over adding two words to your email signature. Everyone has to do things they don't want to in life and adding your pronouns is really not that hard