Preferred pronoun badges at the Halifax bank.

VS the word 'female'means biologically female and should not be taken to mean anything else.

Transmen and non-binary people who have been born female, continue to be female for their whole lives - that's why they might choose to take hormone treatment to make them resemble male people.

It is very foolish to claim that 'female' can mean male people since they, of course, remain male for their whole lives.

It seems many customers are leaving because of this.

"Branding expert Martin Townsend said, on LBC, Halifax's policy is a 'Ratner moment' and an 'astonishing' mistake that will be considered one of the biggest PR blunders in recent history."

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10972407/Halifax-suffers-exodus-customers-staff-pronoun-policy.html

www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/uk-world-news/halifax-hit-exodus-customers-over-24374966

Banks know that they can treat both customers and staff with contempt. They can close branches, make staff redundant, not promote women, pay their executives ginormous bonuses while selling dodgy financial products to people who don't understand what they are buying. Then they can present themselves as virtuous by spending a few quid on badges. They are taking both customers and staff for fools and they know they are.

Well if the Daily Fail says it it must be true. Looking at the Tweets it reproduces I wouldn't want to be associated with half of them. Conservatives, Back Boris-ites and such people don't impress me as being inclusive or interested in diversity.
Why anyone could object so strongly to a word on a badge I don't know. Only repressive regimes police language and wearing your pronoun is a matter of choice for the employee, but it seems some will not permit them to make that choice.

Glorianny

Well if the Daily Fail says it it must be true. Looking at the Tweets it reproduces I wouldn't want to be associated with half of them. Conservatives, Back Boris-ites and such people don't impress me as being inclusive or interested in diversity.
Why anyone could object so strongly to a word on a badge I don't know. Only repressive regimes police language and wearing your pronoun is a matter of choice for the employee, but it seems some will not permit them to make that choice.

It was on other media, but they are paywall. ?

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Well if the Daily Fail says it it must be true. Looking at the Tweets it reproduces I wouldn't want to be associated with half of them. Conservatives, Back Boris-ites and such people don't impress me as being inclusive or interested in diversity.
Why anyone could object so strongly to a word on a badge I don't know. Only repressive regimes police language and wearing your pronoun is a matter of choice for the employee, but it seems some will not permit them to make that choice.

It was on other media, but they are paywall. ?

Well the Coventry Telegraph sites the Mail as its source, so maybe so do the others. That isn't evidence.

What is it that you don't believe Glorianny?

They are reporting things that were said on twitter.
I've seen many similar tweets and you can too, if you have a look at twitter.
I posted Andy M's "If you don't like it, leave" suggestion upthread.

I don't believe that hundreds of people are closing their accounts. Twitter is not a reliable source of information.

Twitter may not be verifiable, but it can be a fairly reliable source to gauge the zeitgeist - particularly of a younger demographic, who are so often quoted as being the drivers of the trans movement.

Anyway, here are some more traditional sources of news, for those who like their news in print:

Metro

Yorkshire Live

The Express, (complete with video of Halifax spokesman)

It is always risky to mix politics with consumer PR. For every supporter of a cause there is an opponent, and nobody likes to feel that they are being coerced into supporting things against their will (or without their consent). I hate it, even when I am in favour of causes - I do not want my support to be assumed so that companies can profit from it.

I don't know that there will be a rush to close Halifax accounts. Although those who feel very strongly about the debacle may well do so, I think that on the whole people are reluctant to change banks, as it feels like a hassle. The problem is more likely to be that people won't open them, and that will include things like taking out insurance, mortgages, regular savings accounts and so on, as they are the sorts of thing that people do renew and switch on a fairly regular basis.

Doodledog

Twitter may not be verifiable, but it can be a fairly reliable source to gauge the zeitgeist - particularly of a younger demographic, who are so often quoted as being the drivers of the trans movement.

Anyway, here are some more traditional sources of news, for those who like their news in print:

Metro

Yorkshire Live

The Express, (complete with video of Halifax spokesman)

It is always risky to mix politics with consumer PR. For every supporter of a cause there is an opponent, and nobody likes to feel that they are being coerced into supporting things against their will (or without their consent). I hate it, even when I am in favour of causes - I do not want my support to be assumed so that companies can profit from it.

I don't know that there will be a rush to close Halifax accounts. Although those who feel very strongly about the debacle may well do so, I think that on the whole people are reluctant to change banks, as it feels like a hassle. The problem is more likely to be that people won't open them, and that will include things like taking out insurance, mortgages, regular savings accounts and so on, as they are the sorts of thing that people do renew and switch on a fairly regular basis.

It is so interesting when you read accounts in the press that clearly do not say what has been claimed by the poster. So in those three accounts the same source is used- it has been reported that accounts worth etc. The source of the report being of course the Daily Fail. Then one of those accounts names several people who don't actually have Halifax accounts but would close them if they had one!!! So what we actually have is a daily Mail report with no names which has been picked up by other papers, people without accounts saying they would close theirs (if they had one) and lots of Twitter people saying they will (although no evidence that they have accounts) . It's so smoke and mirrors it's unbelievable. And some people fall for it!!!!

I have just received a copy of a report concerning the local library, signed with its author's name, clearly female; underneath is added: preferred pronouns: she, her.
Whatever happened to Miss, Mrs, in brackets? If I had to address this woman I would use her title, not call her by her first name, and I certainly wouldn't say 'she.'

I expect she thinks her marital status is neither relevant to her professional role, nor anybody else’s business.

If you wouldn’t use her first name, just use Ms.

And some people fall for it!!!!

Who has fallen for what? 'Some people' doesn't really say much, as there are always 'some people' doing 'something', whether or not it is remotely relevant to any discussion.

If you meant me (I say this as it was my post you quoted in full) I'm no supporter of the Mail, as their spin on things seems to me prurient, unpleasant and too far to the right; but they, like other papers get stories like these from Press Agencies such as Reuters. The fact that other papers use the same sources is irrelevant, and does not mean that the Mail is the source, as you claim. All the papers claim their own reporters as the source - check out the bylines.

The rest of my post stands, anyway, which specifically says that the impact is likely to be less from account closures than from lack of new customers.

Exactly Zone.

Women's marital status does not define their performance at work or what they can do in life

A librarian/doctor/IT professional/etc is still one despite her marital status

Men are always Mr regardless of their marital status.

Agreed, Hithere - 100%.

I don't think a woman should be defined by her sex either, though, which is another downside of having to declare pronouns in emails, when it is not always obvious whether someone is male or female.

If I want my emails to come from Alex Smith, why should I need to qualify that by putting (she/her) after it, if not to let people know that I am a woman? It's all part of the paternalism behind the whole assault on women's rights that this has become.

If you sign yourself Alex Smith you might get mail addressed to "Mr Smith" or "Ms Smith" (or possibly "Miss Smith" or "Mrs Smith")

However it did surprise me when I was working that I quite often got mail addressed to "Mr Smith" or even "Mr Mary Smith" when it should have been obvious that my first name was almost always a female name.

Well yes, but why would it matter if you were addressed by the wrong title? As Hithere says, 'a librarian, doctor or other professional is still one', regardless of sex. If it did matter to you, you could sign it Alexandra, I suppose. Nine times out of ten it should make no difference, though. It's only when someone has a good reason to want to speak to a woman that it should matter, and it seems as though it is getting more and more difficult to do so in those circumstances.

Of course, there are those who respond differently to 'women engineers', 'lady doctors' and so on, which is, to me, all the more reason not to advertise one's sex on an email, and one of the reasons why I object to the trend in expecting employees to do so.

I consider that it is reasonable and indeed best practice for a doctor's receptionist to mention that Dr Smith is a lady doctor if booking an appointment for a male patient.

Well perhaps it does matter to some people. So they prefer to state their chosen pronoun. If you are not bothered there is no requirement of you to state your pronoun or to use any title. Why should one lot of people be able to dictate to another what matters to them?

Glorianny

Well perhaps it does matter to some people. So they prefer to state their chosen pronoun. If you are not bothered there is no requirement of you to state your pronoun or to use any title. Why should one lot of people be able to dictate to another what matters to them?

We agree on all of that.

I don't use a pronoun on email (and it will be a warm January before I do so); but I quite agree that if someone wants to see a (biologically) female doctor, rape counsellor or religious advisor they should be able to do so without jumping through hoops.

Now women resorting to hiding their gender in emails is a good thing?

That's some backwards thinking.

Also a trans man is a man doodledog and won't be offended to be treated as such by a trauma victim... Younger generations are also far more compassionate and understanding towards trauma.

Given that they will be inheriting the whole system it makes sense for them to set the rules.

I dislike the way older generations believe there is hierarchy of respect with themselves at the top.

It doesn't make sense to me for anyone section of society to set the rules.
Kind of flies in the face of inclusivity.

MissA

I agree with your comment - one section makes the rules for all, how fair is that?

How would you feel being addressed as a he when you feel like a she?
We all have the right to be addressed with the identity we agree with

It wouldn't be the end of the world, frankly, particularly if it was an oversight.

Lol