How best to answer 'What are your preferred pronouns?' in an intervew

[NancyDrawed]

I have been out of the workforce for a very long time but finally have an in-person interview later this week.

The confirmation email is signed by a name followed by (he/him/his). I need to get a job. But I am trying to get my head around what I would say if I was directly asked what my preferred pronouns are.

On principle I would like to say 'I'm not a follower of that ideology so use whichever you see fit' or something along those lines, but is that likely to mean I have no chance of getting the job?

I am clearly female, so a small part of me would want to say he/him/his just to see the reaction!

It might not even come up at all, but I'd like to be prepared.

Forgive me if I do not care about the "misgendering" of a rapist. He can call himself Lexi till the cows come home but he's a man who committed a specifically male crime.

The adults who created this made a huge mistake

There’s too much harm for women and children

Being male or female is a fundamental fact of life. Somehow, an individual’s personal identity has been prioritised over society’s need to be able to reflect this fundamental fact about someone when it is important to do so.

And for many people, it is important to be able to acknowledge a person’s sex not their preference in their speech and their actions. It is not appropriate to coerce anyone to have to treat someone as being the sex they wish to be perceived as versus the material reality. Some people believe this is ‘kind’, for some people it is not ‘kind’ at all.

The adults who created this made a huge mistake

They did, and some people at the time foresaw this type of situation, and they were told it only referred to a few thousand people of both sexes.

I know and look where we twenty years later

We should reassess and go in another direction. One that is non falsification and better for women and children

The victims and any witnesses are free to use the descriptions they want. Court officials do not misgender anyone. That is the guidance, and of the two options available, that’s the better one.

A person accused of rape is just as innocent as person accused of any other crime unless they are found guilty.

But yes, it is a conundrum.

I don’t see any point in repeating the same thing again, and I am the wrong person to complain to
about this policy, so I am out of this discussion unless anyone raises a new point.

A person accused of rape

You mean men accused of rape. Male-born men. Their sex, not gender, determines that.

Your misogyny shines through.

Rather than hurt the feelings of the accused by using pronouns that match their sexed bodies, you would rather have court officials deny the reality of a rape victim and significantly exacerbate her trauma.

I just can't get past the idea of having been raped, facing your attacker in court, and having people call him a woman.

It's like some kind of bizarre dystopia.

And one where the misogyny of males like DadJoke shines through. Time after time after time.

This

It's interesting that people like DJ refer to material reality as a pseudo scientific religious belief.

It really does show up their faulty logic and lack of critical thinking.

Material fact and philosophy belief are not the same thing. It is disingenuous to pretend that they are.

Ms only refers to women. It's factual - a polite title given to any woman who wants it as an equivalent to Mr (ie it doesn't reference her marital status like Miss or Mrs). It doesn't involve mental gymnastics, lying, nor referencing a belief system that may not be shared by the speaker.

I wonder whether DJ sees victims and defendants in rape trials as somehow equivalent?

Defendant is (or should be) treated as innocent until proven guilty.

But perhaps they also believe the victim is also on trial, and is 'not raped' until proven 'raped'?

I think that disgusting misogyny underlies how a lot of rape victims are treated by the justice system.

I read somewhere that most trials are about who committed the crime, but rape trials are about whether the crime has even been committed at all - did she change her mind afterwards? It must be soul destroying and extremely invalidating for the victim.

But don't misgender the defendant, that's the main thing. Because the trauma is equivalent 🙄 It does make me wonder why some posters are so invested in rapists rights.

It's interesting that people like DJ refer to material reality as a pseudo scientific religious belief.

Of course they do, it's projection.

This is straightforward personal abuse.

The conviction rate for rape is very low in part because, yes, the victim is treated as if they are on trial. I thoroughly disagree with that. And even in the UK, there is a huge disparity between different police districts in successful prosecutions, which means it can be done. I believe rape victims, even if the defendant is found not guilty of the crime of rape.

The issue is burden of proof and juries not wanting to “ruin the life” of some rapist, and the fear of false accusations even though they are vanishingly rare.

No - not misgendering the defendant is not the “main thing” and I only addressed this because more than one poster asked me to, knowing that it would lead to personal abuse.

I find it interesting that this thread is about one of the cases where the victim was believed and the defendant, a rapist, was convicted and recorded as a man.

Of course it does. Ms implies that women should not have to publicly demonstrate their marital status to the world - a political position with which you agree. If you think a person being non-binary is a political statement which should not be share in front of children, then kids should not have to say Ms. It's nonsensical.

In both cases, you don't have to believe their position to respect the titles they have chosen.

Why as a male do you feel you can override what women are saying to you on these threads?

That's incredibly patronising to other gender critical posters who are more than capable of holding their own in a discussion. I am not "overriding" anyone, I am disagreeing with them, as do women posters who are not gender critical. I was asked about this particular issue, and reluctantly agreed to address it, know it would lead to personal abuse.

I completely understand if you want an echo chamber where only gender critical views are expressed, but many people here do want to see other views.

If you, personally, or any other women on this particular forum ask me not to post here again, I will stop.

@dadjoke there is far more nuance to Ms than that.

I go by Ms because I have a name with my life history and my professional status attached so kept it when I married. (The nane change for women is one of the many unfair sex based biases our society and IMO an underrecognised contributor to the lack of an "old girls" culture of long term social connections.) So for me Ms isI less about not disclosing if I'm married or not on principle and more that Miss would be factually incorrect, while Mrs would lead others to assume my husband has the same surname.

Before I was married I used Ms because I felt it safer for people who had my name and address not to know I was single.

In both cases the driver is practical not political, due to challenges female people face that male people don't. Yes the personal is political but not every pragmatic action is consciously political.

As an agender female what I would love is a set of honorifics and pronouns open to either sex that do not mean "I reject my sex and need you to address me in a way that respects that", but mean "obviously this person has a sex but it's not relevant to the topic at hand". These would not be "preferred pronouns" one requires for oneself, but general purpose language anyone could politely and appropriately use for someone else. Kind of like "they" except specific not general, and without the ideological baggage of non-binary.

I don’t want an echo chamber but I do wonder why men do not listen to women and their experiences

You have been on many threads and so many posts explaining to you and have you considered any?

You cannot know our reality as a male but you could listen

You have again conflated the view of women, with the views of people who want to reduce the rights of transgender people (who are primarily men).

And you've conflated the views of peole who support trans rights (disproportionately women and LGBT people) with the views of men.

The vast majority of women I know outside of this bubble actively support trans rights, and I also have many LGBT+ friends in the circles in which I move whose lives are now far more difficult because of the kind of views expressed here, and the resultant legislation. There are people here who actively want to repeal the EA2010 and GRA, and align themselves with the right on issues of social justice.

I certainly read and take in what you have to say. If you want me gone, just say so.

Well that’s people you know, that’s self selecting obviously, that’s the bubble if you need to use that word.

Women are letting you know on these threads how they feel, and as you are male it’s not your reality

I’m not for driving anyone off but I am asking you to think about what is written and consider that it is our experience.

What do you mean by trans rights, exactly?

I don't want to take anyone anybody's rights. And I'm certainly not right wing!! I believe everyone should be able to live and express themselves however they choose. However, there are situations where rights come into conflict, and this is where most of the heated "debate" takes place and what as a society we are not currently being very good at sorting out.

@FlirtsWithRhinos if you think the use of Ms is not political, I have a bridge to sell you. The fact is that it's accepted now.

It was only ten years ago that a customer wrote to me expressing disgust at being referred to as Ms - suggesting it was horribly modern and didn't respect her views.

Being non-binary is not "consciously political" - it's only people who oppose trans rights who are making it so. You can't get much more personal than gender identity. At some stage I hope it will be straightforwardly accepted, perhaps with an eye roll, just as Ms is now.

As a publisher, I've jumped through hoops to avoid gendered language in our publications, and originally I did so in a way that the old "he is generic" crowd would not be offended. Now I don't care. I'm happy to use they as a non-gendered singular pronoun.

I am more than happy with removing gendered prefixes and honorifics, but where people try to use gender neutral language, you get gender critical people saying "it's erasing women." I'd love to have a non-gendered version of Sir or Ma'am for example.

So, presumably, you disagree with posters who object to the teacher calling themselves teacher?

The transgender rights enacted in the EQ2010 and the GRA. You disagree with those rights and would like them removed. If I'm wrong, then I apologise.