Pronouns? Do you visibly share yours?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

And despite my best efforts and rereading my post, I still misgendered them and used "they". Sigh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

And despite my best efforts and rereading my post, I still misgendered them and used "they". Sigh.

Do you actually feel bad about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

And despite my best efforts and rereading my post, I still misgendered them and used "they". Sigh.

Do you actually feel bad about that?

Seriously. Keeping up with that is a full time job.

I would just ask if I could call them by their last name all the time with no prefix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

And despite my best efforts and rereading my post, I still misgendered them and used "they". Sigh.

Do you actually feel bad about that?

Seriously. Keeping up with that is a full time job.

I would just ask if I could call them by their last name all the time with no prefix.

Same.

I can’t take someone like that seriously. It’s ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Goodness.

That is annoyingly attention seeking.

+1 happy to use someone's preferred pronouns but this is is really beyond. We all have actual work to do and work matters to keep track of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Wait. This person literally wants the coworkers to ask “Excuse me, what pronouns do you feel like using today?” oh a daily basis? Did I understand that correctly?

Do you actually do this every day with your coworker?

[Anonymous]

I didn't used to, but recently put it in my work email signature. I am in higher ed and as a PP said it's become more common there. The main reason I started is because I am in charge of a program where I mentor a small group of students. I found out that at least two of them possibly preferred they/them/their, and it was starting to get really awkward in conversations. The program involves a lot of meetings and discussions, and it's really hard to avoid using pronouns in such settings. But more importantly, part of my job is to help students feel more supported and included. Educators who don't feel that way shouldn't be educators. It's totally different from say an office environment where you may have no obligation to create such an environment for a coworker who is your equal.

One of the students who I suspected was grappling with their pronoun use did add it to their email signature not long after I did. So I'd like to think that my action helped them feel a bit more comfortable sharing, and I don't have to guess anymore which is a relief for me. Higher ed is an interesting place right now. In just the last few years it feels like we have to be much more careful how we talk about gender, disability, race, etc. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but it's a noticeable change and I find myself wanting to avoid certain topics for fear of saying the wrong thing and a student not caring whether it was unintentional or not.

[Anonymous]

Hell, no. I'm not an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Wait. This person literally wants the coworkers to ask “Excuse me, what pronouns do you feel like using today?” oh a daily basis? Did I understand that correctly?

Do you actually do this every day with your coworker?

The person prefers no pronouns and that the gender neutral first name be used rather than any pronouns. I use the gender neutral name 99% of the time and no pronouns so I do not ask. Within the gender spectrum the, the person has a stronger female gender identity at times and will on some days dress in a stereotypically feminine way (high heels, dress, make-up) and I know that on those days the person prefers the female first name be used. However if I still use the gender neutral name on those days, it isn't a huge deal. If one was to use pronouns on those days, as long as they use female pronouns to correspond with the female expression, then the person is also okay with it. The person is an outgoing individual and will sometimes make announcements that today is a 'Clara and she day' at the start of a meeting etc.

[Anonymous]

No.

If you are transgender and want to display your pronouns so that others get your gender right, and how you identify, then great. I can respect that and I'll do my best to identify you how you wish to be identified.

But I do not understand why this is the default. It's not a question or confusing for most people. For the vast majority of people, your gender correlates to your sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised by the amount of folks who don't get that it's. not. about. you.

I'm a woman. I have a woman's name, I use she/her pronouns, I have never in my life had someone look at me and NOT know that I'm a woman, and pretty much everyone that I interact with professionally knows that I'm a woman.

I don't put my pronouns in my email sig so that folks know what pronouns to use with ME. I put pronouns in my email sig so that the 20-something new hire who would like to be treated with respect and called by the pronouns that they prefer can see the example of a leader in the organization publicly displaying pronouns and feel like it's not weird if they do the same.

I don't require ANYONE else to do it, but when you suggest that all allyship is performative, then you diminish folks who are doing any kind of allyship at all.

I do rather suspect that is the point, and while there's a long way on the scale of "grumpy because I think "they" is inherently plural" to blowing up an electrical substation -- it's still the same scale.

The 20 something new hire has grown up to be an adult in pronoun world and knows they can use whatever pronouns they want. I don’t need to use work emails to set examples about private details of my life that I personally do not wish to define me at work. I don’t put disabilities or sexual orientation or mental health diagnoses in my email signatures either even though I want employees to be comfortable being who they are and asking for accommodations if needed. There are many ways to create an inclusive and welcoming work environment without needing to broadcast information about sex or gender or identity in every email. I want my emails to be communication about the work I am doing, not communication about my gender or gender identity or gender expression or sex.

I actually have a 20-something colleague who did feel very uncomfortable being the only one at our office who announced their pronouns, to the extent they haven't come out to 3/4ths of the team because they don't want to have to make a big deal out of it. I think this is unfortunate, and it would be much healthier thing for us to have a mix of signature styles with the option for pronouns and some leaders using them and some not. Personally, I don't care either way (and know people who are viscerally uncomfortable with both pronouns and no pronouns) so I would go with the option that creates the most diversity (e.g., no pronouns if more people have them; pronouns if less people have them). The assumption that all trans/nonbinary/ambiguously gendered young people are hyperconfident in announcing their gender to the world is a big (and inaccurate) assumption and perhaps you think that because none of the closeted folks around you have felt comfortable enough to let you know.

I am not saying every individual is comfortable but this is their world - their generation and the younger ones are primarliy those using the pronouns. What do you suggest we put in emails so that the lesbian new employee feels comfortable referrring to her girlfriend or the employee with low vision feels comfortable asking for larger print or the new hire with depression feels comfortable with a light therapy lamp at their desk or the new hire with chronic pain feels comfortable taking streching breaks or the new hire who is in menopause feels comfortable needing .... What is your solution to making everyone who has an invisible need for an inclusive accommodation comfortable in the workplace via email signature lines?

I think to make the lesbian comfortable about referring to her girlfriend, when I invite her to bring a +1 to happy hour or the holiday party, I say, "Feel free to bring your partner" or "Spouses and partners and significant others are welcome." If I myself am queer (I am), I make a point of referring to *my* wife when we're doing premeeting chitchat so younger people at our firm know they don't have to pretend.

For disability inclusion, I say we proactively ask people what will make their work environment easier, and make a point of having diverse desk/work setups for senior leadership and tell them what parts of my work day I change to make myself more productive so they know it's okay to ask for these things.

Again, I am *not* advocating that everyone put pronouns in emails or be forced to announce them at the beginning of meetings. That puts an undue burden on lots of people for lots of totally valid reasons. But I do think having space for people who *want* to put pronouns in their email signature is polite and having leadership demonstrate that it's okay to use that space is important. It's also important for leadership to demonstrate that it's okay not to use that space.

I agree. Your first examples show that it is possible to be inclusive without needing to make public institution wide announcements in your emails. As I said earlier, people can put whatever personal information in their signature that they want if that is important to them. I interact with one young employee whose pronoun preferences are quite complex and that individual has a line in the email signature that says "Please ask me about my preferred personal pronouns and name." I don't mind that at all and am willing to ask the individual what form of address I should be using that day since I know that is important to them and their gender identity and expression is for them part of who they are as a professional. Since that employee's pronoun preference are dynamic - it would be quite complicated to explain it all in an email signature.

Seriously? How complicated can it be? That strikes me as attention seeking more than anything.

The person is gender fluid and gender queer (see link below for the resource we were sent on definitions) and therefore the person's gender identity differs day to day. They do not have a fixed gender identity. The person prefers no pronouns at all for the most part but if pronouns are to be used then the pronouns need to correspond with the gender being identified with that day. The person also uses two different first names - one is a gender neutral identity name and one is female identifying name. The person's gender expression varies across all gender spectrums. The person is very open about preferences related to gender identity and expression and for the most part patient with people trying their best. The person gets upset about intentional disrespect but not unintentional disrespect.

https://genderspectrum.org/articles/language-of-gender

Wait. This person literally wants the coworkers to ask “Excuse me, what pronouns do you feel like using today?” oh a daily basis? Did I understand that correctly?

Do you actually do this every day with your coworker?

The person prefers no pronouns and that the gender neutral first name be used rather than any pronouns. I use the gender neutral name 99% of the time and no pronouns so I do not ask. Within the gender spectrum the, the person has a stronger female gender identity at times and will on some days dress in a stereotypically feminine way (high heels, dress, make-up) and I know that on those days the person prefers the female first name be used. However if I still use the gender neutral name on those days, it isn't a huge deal. If one was to use pronouns on those days, as long as they use female pronouns to correspond with the female expression, then the person is also okay with it. The person is an outgoing individual and will sometimes make announcements that today is a 'Clara and she day' at the start of a meeting etc.

Good grief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn't used to, but recently put it in my work email signature. I am in higher ed and as a PP said it's become more common there. The main reason I started is because I am in charge of a program where I mentor a small group of students. I found out that at least two of them possibly preferred they/them/their, and it was starting to get really awkward in conversations. The program involves a lot of meetings and discussions, and it's really hard to avoid using pronouns in such settings. But more importantly, part of my job is to help students feel more supported and included. Educators who don't feel that way shouldn't be educators. It's totally different from say an office environment where you may have no obligation to create such an environment for a coworker who is your equal.

One of the students who I suspected was grappling with their pronoun use did add it to their email signature not long after I did. So I'd like to think that my action helped them feel a bit more comfortable sharing, and I don't have to guess anymore which is a relief for me. Higher ed is an interesting place right now. In just the last few years it feels like we have to be much more careful how we talk about gender, disability, race, etc. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but it's a noticeable change and I find myself wanting to avoid certain topics for fear of saying the wrong thing and a student not caring whether it was unintentional or not.

I am a HS teacher. The first day of classes I do a “getting to know you” notecard where I ask basic questions about learning styles, things they are looking forward to that year, etc. Just a few simple questions. I also ask them to write their preferred name and preferred pronouns if they want to (optional). I am careful to use those names and pronouns all year. This, for me, is more effective than pronouns in my email signature in terms of getting necessary info. I don’t list my pronouns even though I have a gender neutral name, or one that could be mistaken as a male name. I just don’t want to. But it’s not because I don’t support my trans students.

[Anonymous]

No, and I never will. I know who I am, I know I am a woman, and I’ve never had anyone wonder.