Staying on topic- threads in general

But the Jakartan women would presumably be "out" in her everyday life so if she used the same e-mail for family there would always be the danger that one of her friends would refer to her using "she" or her transitioned name. If she really was keeping her status a secret she would need two to do it successfully

Just seen this, sorry. Yes, Rosy, in what world are email conversations likely to include friends, family and professional contacts? Are we back to scenarios in fictional novels? Of course it's not going to arise.

And assuming that someone is necessarily 'out' to their family is incredibly naive, particularly coming from someone who knows so many transpeople. At the risk of banging a drum, cultural norms (which includes the acceptability of things such as transsexuality, homosexuality and so on) vary massively between groups, and I have personally known more than one person who has been disowned by their family because they failed to keep an aspect of their life private, even when they have moved to the other side of the world in the hope of doing so.

Mollygo

FarNorth

Multiple FacePalms ???

'Sex' = biological sex (female or male)

'Gender' = archaic sexist stereotypes

I’ve been away, came back, read the last page and have since just managed to read through these. Doodledog please don’t shoot yourself!
FarNorth that’s a very clear post.
Sex -you can’t change it. If you are female, you are female. You are a woman, and can be a mother or not.
You can SAY you are a man, or a father, you can add or remove bits, grow a beard and have a deep voice and a hairy chest, but you are still a female.

For those who can’t tell the difference, Sex is immutable, Gender you can swap day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute. You can SAY you are any gender.
What you shouldn’t be able to do is erode the rights of those who are the sex you wish you were just because you want to change gender.
The horrifying thing is that it’s a minority of trans and their fans who want to do the eroding, who physically and verbally attack females for speaking the truth about sex being immutable and female rights being eroded and applaud each other for doing so, throwing the language of hate at anyone who disagrees. Almost as bad - the media who give them the publicity they so ardently seek.
I believe the majority of trans don’t want the publicity or to stir up anger against others. They simply want to live their lives in peace.
Possibly some posters on here think that’s wrong.

This post by mollygo is so good that I wanted to re-post it.
It says everything relevant in a nutshell.

A new pronoun might be ideal but would be opposed by some and they wouldn't use it.

Preferred pronouns are opposed by some, who won't use them.

I'm one who will be using 'they' as seems appropriate to me, rather than get involved in trying to 'categorise' everyone.

As I've said, I will use 'they' if asked, but see no need for people to be compelled to publicly 'genderise' themselves by employers.

So the argument now seems to be that we shouldnt' ask for or use preferred pronouns because the cultural origins of someone may mean that their identity is not accepted by their family or friends. So how far should we take this changing of principles or restrictions on individual freedoms. I once heard a very educated and highly qualified man of Middle Eastern origins use much the same excuse to explain why his daughters would probably be subjected to FGM, because his wives expected it and would worry that without it the girl would be unmarriageble. He knew it was wrong but he had to accept their beliefs.
It seems to me that objecting to preferred pronouns on the basis of other cultures plays into exactly the same sort of beliefs. It's just a question of how far you are willing to go.

No, the argument is that compelling people to declare pronouns may have consequences that people haven't thought of.

"Case by case" is something popular with trans activists.
Clearly the FGM case is completely different from the pronoun case, in their effects.

Some people are being permanently mutilated by their attempts to change sex, which could perhaps be compared to FGM.
No-one is being mutilated by any kind of pronoun use.

But the acceptance of one standard that is that some people may suffer in their country of origin if they reveal their trans status surely means you are accepting those norms. And no people aren't mutilated they are actually killed in some cases. So shouldn't those norms be challenged.
Exactly the same family circumstance apply that the girl's mother will be upset or offended and she will not live the life the family want for her.
Who decides exactly which restrictions are OK and which aren't?

No-one decides.
Of course FGM should not be tolerated.

I'm ignoring the idiotic 'link' to FGM, as (like the flowers that bloom in the spring) it has nothing at all to do with the case.

What I will say is that wanting to protect people's privacy has nothing to do with accepting intolerance in other countries. It has to do with respect for other people's boundaries.

There has still, predictably, not been an answer to a far more pressing question, which is why it matters for someone to know the sex, gender or anything else about the person they are emailing in anything other than a social or dating capacity. In a professional context it is (or should be) entirely irrelevant.

Oh, and good luck with challenging the norms in other countries, particularly as a woman who doesn't live there. It would be good if people were not put at risk in the meanwhile, though.

It's not just people with family abroad, though - what's the difference between asking people choose a gender pronoun on an email sig and asking them to declare their race or sexuality? Surely you can see the inherent risks in doing that?

I didn't expect you to have an answer Doodledog .
If people hide their true selves it is usually because revealing it would result in persecution. In tacitly accepting such restrictions you give approval to this.

There has still, predictably, not been an answer to a far more pressing question, which is why it matters for someone to know the sex, gender or anything else about the person they are emailing in anything other than a social or dating capacity. In a professional context it is (or should be) entirely irrelevant.

Well I suppose it doesn't matter so the pronoun used could be "they" .
However people should have the right to ask for the pronoun they prefer.

*I didn't expect you to have an answer Doodledog .
If people hide their true selves it is usually because revealing it would result in persecution. In tacitly accepting such restrictions you give approval to this.*

I have no answer, as IMO there isn't one. There is no need for anyone to decide which restrictions are ok - people have a right to decide for themselves!

I absolutely have not given approval to persecution here or anywhere else, much less to torture or murder, and I find it very offensive that you have suggested I have.

For one thing, I am not asking people to do anything they don't want to do. I am the one opposing the insistence that people declare their personal details on email addresses that can be seen by anyone.

I am not telling people that Dr X or Professor Y is not enough information to give strangers - that people need to say what gender they are, when nobody seems to know the reason why this is important.

I am not telling people that they should hide their true selves, but neither am I saying that I know best and that they should challenge the norms of a different culture as not to do so would be accepting those norms.

It is not my place to do any of that. People coming her in fear of persecution have enough to put up with without self-righteous meddlers asking them to conform to their ideas of how intolerance should be tackled.

Doodledog the answer is that, except in the circumstances you mentioned, it shouldn’t matter.
If those who wish to be known as ‘they’ want to put that then ‘they’ should be allowed to do so, but why should anyone else have to change their normal signature to suit the ‘theys’.
If there are those saying we are entitled to know the sex of the person emailing, then I’d say OK, but it has to include everyone,
so
Females must indicate F
Males- must add M
TW - must add TW
TM- must add TM
Non-Binary must add NB
those who like to flit from one gender to another could add GFW with the date or GFM with the date so recipients would know what to expect on that day.
We could then use he and she for the first two and they for the others. Under those circumstances I’d be happy to indicate on my emails.
I suspect that would not be acceptable to all TP etc, but maybe trisher would know more about that.

I would still question why we need to know the sex, Molly. Unless we are going back to when the word of a woman was seen as worth less than that of a man, I don't know how knowing whether someone is male or female is remotely relevant, and more than knowing which gender pronoun they prefer.

Emails are addressed to Dear X, and the only pronoun used to the recipient is 'you'. Under what circumstances would the writer address them as 'they' (or he/she)?

To me, asking for a gender pronoun is akin to asking people to declare their sexuality or their race or religion, and nobody would suggest that that would be appropriate, surely?

What is the supposed point of pronouns in email signatures?
Are all correspondents supposed to remember each other's pronouns, in case they need to mention someone, in 3rd person, in an email to someone else?
I'm sure everyone has managed to cope, up until now, with not knowing the sex or gender identity of Professor J Smith who has emailed them.

This is what I'm asking - in fact any reasons behind asking all seem dubious to me, and the consequences could be dangerous. But apparently that makes me complicit in atrocities such as FGM, and goodness knows what else.

There is absolutely no reason for them to add these pronouns to their email signature apart from to make a clear political statement on their position on a very divisive issue. You wouldn't expect to see anyone stating their position on Brexit in their email signatures, with "Leave" or "Remain" added under their contact details. Or people stating "Christ is Lord" or "Allahu Akbar". Or "Vaccinate now" or "Lift lockdown" added. So why are personal pronouns required?

I'm really gobsmacked at the large numbers of people who are asking for this stuff, signing letters saying they feel 'unsafe' (did they sign with pronouns, I wonder), demanding sacking of people who don't go along with it etc.
How will they cope when it all collapses around them (as I very much hope it will)?

Perhaps people could start adding a short slogan of their choice.
That could be fun!

My name is one that is both a male and a female name (think Chris but it's not), so at the foot of my work email it has "Chris Chewbacca" - no way of knowing what sex/gender I am. I receive just as many emails addressed to Mr Chewbacca as I do to Ms Chewbacca and it bothers me not one jot - why would it? The only time it comes up for discussion is when an email is followed up by a telephone conversation! And then it's just laughed about, vague apologies made and accepted and it's back to business. I have never, after almost 70 years of having my name, ever thought to take offence. In fact, when my closest friend christened one of her sons with my name, I was deeply flattered!

Oh I like the idea of a slogan FarNorth

I do wonder at the people that sign these letters saying they feel unsafe and want 'offenders' sacked or cancelled, do they not feel embarrassed to proclaim themselves bullying wimps? There's that Scottish actor who loves to get the police onto women, especially if they've tweeted an image of ribbons in suffragette colours. He doesn't feel safe because we all know how dangerous ribbons are, yet thinks penises in women's prisons and refuges and spas are totally OK.

Chewbacca why stop at religion, covid beliefs, Brexit status......people could indicate other allegiances, football team, omnivore, veggie or vegan status........I'm on a roll now how about car or plane use or not, for or against Insulate Britain.... the possibilities are endless and everyone would know the touchy subjects to be avoided where there were differences and we'd all feel 'safer'.

Why ever not Rosie51? What could possibly go wrong?

Absolutely nothing Chewbacca absolutely nothing ???