Pronouns? Do you visibly share yours?

[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.

Holy narcissism.

[Anonymous]

No, I think I look like the pronouns that I am and if anyone wants to ask, they are more than welcome to do so. I'd feel silly as feminine looking 'Sarah Smith' putting pronouns in my bio.

[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

Um, no one has time to deal with all of this. They use different names from day to day? I'd be tempted to either never address them or just say "hey, you". I cannot imagine what would happen if everyone operated like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have your pronouns in your email or other places?

I know a trainer who requires students use pronouns to be inclusive yet I wonder what if I am a "they" and don't want to share my pronouns? Then, I will lie to protect myself or not attend the training. That doesn't feel inclusive to me.

--Do people feel better when pronouns are shared?
--Is sharing pronouns always an inclusive act? Sometimes, the way people do it appears performative to me.

The bolded is directly contradictory.

Exactly! I’m glad someone feels the same way.

OP

[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

😊

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do the pronoun idiots realize how they're being offensive?

If you require everyone to list a pronoun, you could force someone who isn't ready to come out to come out. And then they'll feel uncomfortable. They can't not most their pronouns either, because then they'd get on some progresisve's s list as some sort of Trump supporter when in reality they just do not want to reveal anything about their sexual orientation because they aren't ready yet.

Do your damn work and stop caring about who people sleep with in bed.

This. +1

OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the pronoun idiots realize how they're being offensive?

If you require everyone to list a pronoun, you could force someone who isn't ready to come out to come out. And then they'll feel uncomfortable. They can't not most their pronouns either, because then they'd get on some progresisve's s list as some sort of Trump supporter when in reality they just do not want to reveal anything about their sexual orientation because they aren't ready yet.

Do your damn work and stop caring about who people sleep with in bed.

Curious if there are any closeted people who care to weigh in on this. My general view is that it is totally harmless for me to share my pronouns, but if not, perhaps I will reconsider.

I'm not closeted but I've thought of this before. There are ways that "support" can go awry. For example, DH's (very large) employer asked his office to maintain a list of people in the LGBTQIA+ community so they can meet their metrics of diversity outreach. DH is very wary of that. So many pitfalls.

My DS is gay and his preferred pronoun is the one assigned at birth so no issues there. But, what if it wasn't? What if he would prefer she/her but he wasn't quite ready to shout it from the rooftops? Instead, he would have to actively claim he/him as his preference even though it would go against everything that he feels.

So, I think people should do it or not based on whatever they want to do. No pressure. No expectation.

This is what I think, too.

I definitely won’t work with that trainer. Their view that everyone must use pronouns feels NOT inclusive to me. I think people should choose.

[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

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.

Holy narcissism.

😱 😱

[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

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.

Holy narcissism.

Yeah, I’d say that’s unbelievable… except unfortunately it is totally believable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the pronoun idiots realize how they're being offensive?

If you require everyone to list a pronoun, you could force someone who isn't ready to come out to come out. And then they'll feel uncomfortable. They can't not most their pronouns either, because then they'd get on some progresisve's s list as some sort of Trump supporter when in reality they just do not want to reveal anything about their sexual orientation because they aren't ready yet.

Do your damn work and stop caring about who people sleep with in bed.

This. +1

OP

Pronouns have nothing to do with who you sleep with, not sure what that has to do with anything.

[Anonymous]

As someone who has to communicate their pronouns to avoid being misgendered, just wanted to say I appreciate all those who who don’t need to because their gender presentation very obviously matches their pronouns and yet do it anyway to help normalize it. I know it feels odd and unnecessary but it’s not just virtue signaling. You are genuinely making your workplace a safer and more welcoming place for your trans and gender nonconforming colleagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the pronoun idiots realize how they're being offensive?

If you require everyone to list a pronoun, you could force someone who isn't ready to come out to come out. And then they'll feel uncomfortable. They can't not most their pronouns either, because then they'd get on some progresisve's s list as some sort of Trump supporter when in reality they just do not want to reveal anything about their sexual orientation because they aren't ready yet.

Do your damn work and stop caring about who people sleep with in bed.

This. +1

OP

Pronouns have nothing to do with who you sleep with, not sure what that has to do with anything.

Haha this! It’s not like queer people are signing “Larla A. Smith (lez/lezbo)” If you see pronouns and immediately think about who they sleep with with then you’re the one who needs to focus on your work and stop thinking about your coworkers having sex, perv.

[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

Um, no one has time to deal with all of this. They use different names from day to day? I'd be tempted to either never address them or just say "hey, you". I cannot imagine what would happen if everyone operated like this.

I wonder why many feel the whole pronoun issue has become ridiculous?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not buying into this lunacy

This 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, unless you are anything other than heterosexual, it is performative.

For the record, there are plenty of homosexual people who think this gender and pronoun stuff is nonsense.