M&S diversity officers give staff pronoun badges……. a step too far?

?Brilliant

Calistemon

Chestnut

Not weird at all Chewbacca. This whole business reminds me of the saying you can please all of the people some of the time, or some of the people all of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. That is what this is attempting to do and it won't work.

This quote facility isn't working, is it!

Chewbacca didn't say it was weird.

I was supporting Chewbacca. It was trisher who thought was she said was weird.

Chestnut

Calistemon

Chestnut

Not weird at all Chewbacca. This whole business reminds me of the saying you can please all of the people some of the time, or some of the people all of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. That is what this is attempting to do and it won't work.

This quote facility isn't working, is it!

Chewbacca didn't say it was weird.

I was supporting Chewbacca. It was trisher who thought was she said was weird.

Got it!
?

Doodledog

I can assure you that I am not squirming.

Also, there is no need to patronise. I don't need things explaining if they are clearly written, and nor, I expect do the majority of posters on Gransnet. Can you show me where I suggested that I didn't understand that the stated purpose of the badges was to stop misgendering? As I said (as opposed to the ideas you are putting into my mouth), I don't object to the badges, I just question their efficacy. I don't see how they keep anyone 'safe', and doubt they will stop misgendering as most people will trust the evidence of their eyes in the highly unlikely event that they stop to think about the gender of a staff member at all. It's unlikely to matter to anyone just doing their shopping, really.

There would be no need for you to go into details if you hadn't suggested such a convoluted and unlikely scenario to 'explain' why the badges might be needed.

Well there you are one of the clearest explanations of why, en-route to gender norms being abolished, these badges are a great idea, because if people stop relying solely on the "evidence of their eyes" and become accustomed to looking at badges or asking "which pronoun do you prefer" then all gender norms will disappear, which is I believe exactly what some people have said they want.

Some people have said they want all sorts of things. I am prepared to humour individuals by calling them what they ask me to call them. I am not, however, prepared to be told by M&S that I must go along with what has become an extremist movement to eradicate women. It’s a shop, not a political movement, and has no right to push an agenda at its customers.

I feel for transpeople who have never wanted to be part of this. They were making progress with what I think was the majority of people, and had gained widespread acceptance, until the No Debate lobby swept away reason and sense, gaslighting people into doubting the evidence of their eyes, and telling us that women includes men, whilst simultaneously refusing to define what a woman actually is. They are likely to be the victims when enough people have woken up to the fact that it matters for women to have safe spaces, bodily autonomy and political rights, and that sex-based categories in sport are often necessary for a level playing field (no pun intended).

Oh really? No reality at all, just a label that says "This is a XXXX" ? We could extend this concept, we'd save a fortune on Christmas presents. Just give everyone a box with a pretty label on it saying, "This is a cashmere coat" or, "This is a Ferrari".

Really, Trisher, you might think that badges stating people's pronoun preferences are the best invention since sliced bread, but you can't be expecting them to replace using the five senses we were born with, plus a healthy dose of common sense.

It’s a waste of time talking to t. Who are the ‘some people’ she talks about? Where do they (plural pronoun for a number of people) hang out? Are they all working in M&S? Is it a plan to get more people to order on line to avoid dealing with this?
Big side track . . .
Will they move on to being like Lush? Supporting something which is deplored when we see it happening to girls in Africa for cultural reasons but which is being seen as right when performed on girls in this country because it’s new, modern thinking?

The only reason any of you know I am a woman is because I say so and not a single one of you has asked me to prove it.

I'm a woman because I say I am.

The writing on the badge is so small with my eyesight I would have to buttonhole the wearer and grab them (careful use of pronoun) up close. Not a good idea with Covid plus it might alarm the wearer to have some elderly woman (probably) doing this.

Why do we need this? Aren’t there better things to do that are effective. If I am not sure of someone’s gender when writing or speaking to anyone about that person I would refer to them as them.

“Or your member of staff Chris was very helpful. They did x. “ If talking to management.

Doodledog

Some people have said they want all sorts of things. I am prepared to humour individuals by calling them what they ask me to call them. I am not, however, prepared to be told by M&S that I must go along with what has become an extremist movement to eradicate women. It’s a shop, not a political movement, and has no right to push an agenda at its customers.

I feel for transpeople who have never wanted to be part of this. They were making progress with what I think was the majority of people, and had gained widespread acceptance, until the No Debate lobby swept away reason and sense, gaslighting people into doubting the evidence of their eyes, and telling us that women includes men, whilst simultaneously refusing to define what a woman actually is. They are likely to be the victims when enough people have woken up to the fact that it matters for women to have safe spaces, bodily autonomy and political rights, and that sex-based categories in sport are often necessary for a level playing field (no pun intended).

Is M&S telling you that Doodledog? I thought they were simply complying with a request from a staff member that those who wish to could have their chosen pronoun displayed on their name badge. Linking that in to an attempt to eradicate women seems a bit extreme. Poor M&S!

This constant repetition of trying to define what a woman actually is confuses me. I'm quite willing to admit I fail to understand why it matters. Mostly I accept as women the people who say they are women. Am I expected to have a tick list for a definition and cross examine everyone, marking off their answers? Will a "proper"woman tick off everything? And what of the ones that don't? Do they become non-women? And are they therefore men? Does this mean that transmen have to be women? Do explain it to me.

I have yet to see in any of these discussions any indication that anyone supporting transrights in anyway wants or even thinks women should be exposed to any sort of violence or to lose safe spaces.

As sport is a category where women have routinely been abused and assaulted in attempts to regulate sex based sports it's something that needs looking at but to imagine the present situation or the recent past is in any way woman-friendly is simply laughable.

Who are the ‘some people’ she talks about?

They appear all over these threads. They are the 'some people' who don't recognise how prejudice works, the 'some people' who are in favour of discrimination, the 'some people' who are akin to Nazis and racists, and who fear transpeople to the point of phobia.

The beauty of these 'some people' is that they are so non-specific that they don't get the chance to fight back. In fact if they do they are accused of arrogance for thinking that a dig is being made at them, and not one of the other 'some people'.

If one of the 'some people' asks for clarification of what 'some people' means, and who it is referencing, their request is ignored. It's almost as though the anti-somepeopleists want to erase them altogether, shifting the meaning of the word to suit themselves, and denying their very existence when pressed. Perhaps 'some people' are those who present as 'some people', and who share the political outlook of these who support them?

It's kind of tough being one of the 'some people'. Maybe they should have a support group of their own with a vociferous band of allies?

Doodledog good post as always.

Well there you are one of the clearest explanations of why, en-route to gender norms being abolished, these badges are a great idea, because if people stop relying solely on the "evidence of their eyes" and become accustomed to looking at badges or asking "which pronoun do you prefer" then all gender norms will disappear, which is I believe exactly what some people have said they want.

And there you have it, the totally ignorant attitude towards blind people, learning disabled people, the illiterate as well as a host of others. So every transaction will need the shop staff to ask the customer what their preferred pronouns are, or will we all be compelled to wear badges at all times? Nobody is going to be able to remember 100s of different people's preferred pronouns.

Should these name badges have options for other really important aspects of the staff member's life? Maybe 'Christian' so customers and fellow staff know never to blaspheme within earshot of that staff member, as they could find it offensive, upsetting and make them feel unsafe.

This constant repetition of trying to define what a woman actually is confuses me. I'm quite willing to admit I fail to understand why it matters. trisher do you eschew definitions of other words or is it just woman that confuses you? Do you have a definition for female for example? Or child?

Is M&S telling you that Doodledog? I thought they were simply complying with a request from a staff member that those who wish to could have their chosen pronoun displayed on their name badge. Linking that in to an attempt to eradicate women seems a bit extreme. Poor M&S!
Do you understand politics at all? It is the small steps that lead to bigger ones. If 'those who wished to' were allowed to state that they were heterosexual on a badge, where do you think that would be likely to lead for those who chose not to do so?

This constant repetition of trying to define what a woman actually is confuses me. I'm quite willing to admit I fail to understand why it matters.
Really? You fail to understand why it matters, yet you are willing to deny those of us who are very clear that a woman is an adult human female the right to keep the term to ourselves? You don't understand why it matters, but you are happy to apply the term to anyone who wants to use it? Why don't you ask all the transpeople you say you know just what it is that they are going to such lengths to become, (or to reject if they are transmen)? Why are you supporting their right to be something the concept of which you fail to understand?

Mostly I accept as women the people who say they are women. Am I expected to have a tick list for a definition and cross examine everyone, marking off their answers? Will a "proper"woman tick off everything? And what of the ones that don't? Do they become non-women? And are they therefore men? Does this mean that transmen have to be women? Do explain it to me.
This is sounding more and more like the Monty Python sketch about how to tell a witch.

Villager: We have found a witch, may we burn her?
Crowd: BURN!! BUUUURN HER!
Bedevere: But how do you know she is a witch?
Villager: She looks like one!
Other Villagers: Yeah! She looks like one!!!
Bedevere: Bring her forward.

I have yet to see in any of these discussions any indication that anyone supporting transrights in anyway wants or even thinks women should be exposed to any sort of violence or to lose safe spaces.
And I have never seen any indication that they could care less if these things happen.

As sport is a category where women have routinely been abused and assaulted in attempts to regulate sex based sports it's something that needs looking at but to imagine the present situation or the recent past is in any way woman-friendly is simply laughable.
I'm not laughing. Call me humourless, but I don't think it's funny at all. The abuse and assault of women is always something that upsets me, but as I have said each time you bring this up, two wrongs have never made a right, and to use the assault as justification for the absolute unfairness of pitting women against men in strength-based sport is offensive to the victims of the assault as well as to the competitors who have little chance of winning.

As I said, I am a woman because I say I am. There was no biological process that sealed the deal for me, none of those biological processes were the same experience as anyone elses. I just am a woman because I feel like one. Simple

So what? You're not the issue that's being discussed here. The thread is about pronouns on name badges and whether they are necessary.

The question was asked Chewbacca and so I answered.

Why are people who don't need/want them arguing that they aren't necessary accross so many pages?

First trans people were apparently asking too much and now they shouldn't need so little.

It sends a rather sad message to trans people, don't you think?

VioletSky you're obviously not a scientist or else you'd know that it is precisely because of biological processes that you are a woman. Do you deny all science or just the bits that don't fit your thought process? Or are you making a distinction between 'woman' and 'female' ? If so why? They've been interchangeable since speech developed them, it's only recently there are some wishing them to divorce.

If 'those who wished to' were allowed to state that they were heterosexual on a badge, where do you think that would be likely to lead for those who chose not to do so?

This is precisely the point and one I, and others, have mentioned several times before. There is no argument that anyone can refer to themselves as anything they like but surely, by drawing attention to your name and pronoun you're setting yourself up to be "othered". Apart from some rather bizarre scenarios of customers falling down on "Chris", I've still not seen one single example of why a pronoun on a name badge is a good idea. Homosexuals, trans and other minorities have a hard enough job being accepted by large swathes of society; why put a target on them so that they're easier to identify and "other"?

It sends a rather sad message to trans people, don't you think?

No.

Rosie51

VioletSky you're obviously not a scientist or else you'd know that it is precisely because of biological processes that you are a woman. Do you deny all science or just the bits that don't fit your thought process? Or are you making a distinction between 'woman' and 'female' ? If so why? They've been interchangeable since speech developed them, it's only recently there are some wishing them to divorce.

So when did it happen for you?

Did you wake up one morning and say "ah! I am now woman!"

I didn't and neither do trans women, they just know.

Quite often they fight it, they try to accept the biological parts they were born with and it just doesn't work and causes them huge harm.

Watch some transition stories, listen to them. Because they are telling you the truth.

Chewbacca yes it does. Because these same assertions that there are only 2 sexes and that cannot change are all accross the Internet and it is sending a painful and untrue message to real genuine people who are living as their authentic selves.

If we accept trans people even though we believe allowing them into some spaces is problematic, why argue against pronoun badges?

When pronoun badges mean people will stop shopping at M&S or some of the other things mentioned so far, it's going to cause sadness to trans people.

Saying otherwise is like saying the earth is flat.

I don't know what a woman feels like, but I know what I am because I have female biology. Nobody has ever told me what a woman feels like, I'm sure it can't be a uniform feeling for every single one of us, so biology is all we have.

VioletSky this image is of Stefonknee Wolschtt a transgender person who identifies as a 6 year old girl. Do you agree this is what Stefonknee is because that's what Stefonknee feels like? Should Stefonknee be allowed to go to school and play with other 6 year olds?

So the arguments against having a pronoun on badges (and it is entirely voluntary no one is being made to do it)
seem to be
1. it's not necessary because we don't use pronouns about these people (well as has been shown you might)
2. By showing their chosen pronoun transpeople are opening themselves up to abuse (well let's all wear one, then they won't be "othered" and no one will know who is trans and who isn't)
3. And goodness knows this is really scraping the barrel. The blind, the disabled and the illiterate won't be able to read them. (Which means name badges had better go altogether). But having contact with disabled people, and severely dyslexic relatives I think actually they would usually ask politely for a name and if the pronoun was told to them along with the name they would use it.
This whole argument of you can only be trans if you keep quiet about it just shows how much further there is to go to acheive equality. That people can't appreciate that is mind blowing.