Preferred pronoun badges at the Halifax bank.

MissA

One thing is making a mistake, we are human

Something else is denying a person their own identity by addressing them incorrectly

It is bullying if someone consistently refuses to use a persons preferred pronouns, but I can hardly imagine a bank customer calling in regularly just to do that.

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?

There have been 'everyday sexism' threads on here where women report being disregarded because a man was thought to be more knowledgeable/ to hold the pursestrings/ to be the boss etc.

I've also seen reports from women of having much more useful email interactions with business contacts when their email signature is unisex.

This obsession with fitting people into boxes and labeling them is so regressive.

Most of us would agree we prefer democracy.....

It is a never ending battle between the young and the old.

Right are rights..

Sometimes we have to find a way to accept what we don't understand in order to bridge those gaps

The only question is whether people have really tried to understand the needs of those who are different to ourselves in some way... and whether it is right to stand in judgement over them

Lol.

Oh dear

This obsession with fitting people into boxes and labeling them is so regressive I agree FarNorth.

Deliberately addressing someone incorrectly is of course wrong but I can't help but think that we are being set up to fail.

Many feminists who started out by being kind and using preferred pronouns have now changed their minds as they have seen self-id of sex becoming the norm without any legislation to make it so, and as they learn that the word 'woman' now has no definition at all except in the mind of any individual who wants to 'identify as a woman'.

Far North those are genuinely vile unfair representations of trans people

Yes it's frightening FarNorth and even though we can see what's happened, it's still almost impossible to believe.

VioletSky the cartoons are unflattering & flippant, yes, but all those situations have already happened and continue to happen.

FarNorth they are propaganda.

Absolutely no reflection of every day trans people.

Absolute extremism in view.

A percentage of the total of humanity are extremely awful people. Whatever their sex, gender, sexuality, race or religion.

They are the reason we need laws and prison sentences.

We also protect the rights of minorities under law.

Because people will discriminate and that is unlawful.

One of the ways people discriminate is propoganda like this, designed to cause fear or anger towards any minority group.

Now I will sit and have a discussion and a laugh with anyone, as long as they do no harm whatever their beliefs or their personal status...

Can you honestly tell me, these images do no harm?

Perhaps they have but equating them with happening just because the required pronoun is used is a bit like believing that the bloke who holds the door open for you only does it because he thinks you're a useless, feeble female. It may be true but it's highly unlikely.

Sorry that's a comment on Far Norths' image. I hesitate to call it a cartoon. It isn't funny.

The first one illustrates exactly what this thread is about, and what I said already.

Using "preferred pronouns" seems innocuous but then there is the barrage further demands.

Perhaps they have [happened] you say Glorianny yet you think those things happening are trivial compared to an unflattering depiction of male people claiming to be women?

No-one thinks they are funny, btw. 'Cartoon' refers to the style of drawing.

Disgusting.

Really disgusting

I recently emailed my local council about something. Sharon replied, kindly adding her pronouns. I replied “Dear Sharon” but, although willing, I couldn’t see an opportunity to incorporate her pronouns, and I thought my own designation, Mrs., would suffice, so I didn’t add my own pronouns. I couldn’t imagine a scenario where they would be needed.

VioletSky

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.

I have never felt that my sex is important in my work. I don't have a gender to hide, so that's immaterial, and is another reason why I don't declare one. It is clear when someone meets me that I am a woman, so there is no deception - it's just that if someone emails me there is no need for them to know if I an Alexander or Alexandra. Why does it matter? Women have been discriminated against in the workplace for decades - if you've missed that, you are more naive than I thought.

The 'young v old' trope is tired now. I most certainly don't look at life in a hierarchical manner, and if I did I wouldn't base it on age. I respect people for their actions, and their attitudes, regardless of their age.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with the 'transman is a man' comment. In the scenario described there would only be a chance of someone who was traumatised getting to speak to a transman if he were in a counselling or medical role and available for consultation. My point is that if a victim wanted to speak to a woman, she (the victim) might be happy to speak to any female-bodied person, and that may include a transman. This was in response to your idea that all she needed to do would be to ask for a so-called 'cis' woman, and she would get what she needed. Unless the transman identified as 'ciswoman' (unlikely) that is not going to happen, is it? Equally, a GN woman (who is female) and/or a GC feminist (who is female) may choose not to identify as 'cis' either, so your suggestion is even less useful than at first glance. For reference, what I posted is below:

VS, in MissA’s scenario, asking for a so-called ‘cis’ woman would not solve the problem, as she might be happy to speak to a transman or a female-bodied ‘gender-neutral’ person, neither of whom would identify as ‘cis’, and might be offended to be excluded. She might also prefer a feminist who would understand her fears of talking to a male (however he ‘identified’) and she might not answer to ‘cis’ either.

PS - I should point out that I don't declare a pronoun, but my work does not involve anyone confiding things of a sexual or gynaecological nature, as neither is relevant to my line of work.

That's an example of what I meant when I posted earlier that I think we are being set up to fail Delila. If we don't know which pronouns to use so don't use any, that's wrong and using the 'wrong' pronoun is even worse.

Perhaps they have there's no perhaps about it Glorianny it is happening and whether or not a common denominator is the use of preferred pronouns, it should be considered and not simply dismissed.

Word salad doodledog

Delila

I recently emailed my local council about something. Sharon replied, kindly adding her pronouns. I replied “Dear Sharon” but, although willing, I couldn’t see an opportunity to incorporate her pronouns, and I thought my own designation, Mrs., would suffice, so I didn’t add my own pronouns. I couldn’t imagine a scenario where they would be needed.

This is another way in which trans ideology is piggybacking onto other issues. The issue of women declaring their marital status is one that people are increasingly fighting against.

Mrs/Ms/Miss are titles, rather than pronouns, but the email pronoun trend is getting conflated with the title one, so the baby ends up being thrown out with the bathwater. They are two separate issues.

Similarly, people draw comparisons between trans issues and gay issues. Trans identification is not a sexuality, but Stonewall would like it to be conflated with sexuality so that it can continue to represent transpeople now that gay people have the right to marry (which, of course, Stonewall was against, as it would have put them out of business had not trans rights helpfully come along to replace gay rights). Again, they are two separate issues.

VioletSky

Word salad doodledog

Really? Point out which bits are confusing for you, and I will explain.

(or do the usual and tell me you have better things to do, as it is not that difficult and you do understand it really).

I did spend precious time typing a response but then I deleted it