Gender pronouns in the workplace

[Alex337]

Alex337:

They/ them actually has historical use and language evolves, I’m an English teacher and it’s just how it goes. We often use they/them as a singular when we don’t know the sex of the person, e.g. “Pizza’s here, they’re at the door” it’s a far better option than the also incorrect “it”.

I wonder, though, if this is an example of language evolving, or is it rather an example of devolution instead? I am in favor of the evolution of language, particularly when the changes are organic and can clarify troublesome issues, but when the changes are imposed from without, as it were, and not in the service of clarification but rather to suit the biases of a certain group, I begin to have a problem. As Shaw’s Higgins says, this is the language of Shakespeare and Milton. We should be wary of wholesale, arbitrary changes to a tongue with such an exalted lineage.

In this case we already use it as a singular pronoun. English lacking a for a neutral pronoun is quite a lack, it’s a lacuna.

Language doesn’t really “de-evolve”. It shifts and moves.

 

[Alex337]

Exactly. In the end what does it really matter? Just be polite to folks.

 

[Paul71]

Then people have a better idea who they are addressing, I guess. Years ago on the the old CAF posters who had interacted with frequently would be surprised that I was female, some even seemed dismayed, as though I had misled them.

I understand that on an anonymous forum like this, people may sometimes assume that a woman is a man, or vice versa. I think it is helpful, though not necessary, if someone indicates “male” or “female” in their profile. In fact, I think the old Catholic Answers Forums site had a “sex” or “gender” field where one could indicate “male” or “female.”

What I was (and still am) a bit confused about is why a person would choose to list gender pronouns (e.g., she/her/hers) rather than just listing sex/gender (e.g., female). I guess that listing the pronouns seems to me a bit condescending (as in, “I don’t trust you to know the right pronoun to use if I only tell you my sex, so I’m going to really spell it out for you”), and perhaps also ideologically loaded (as in, "biologically I’m a male, but I want to be referred to as “she”). I’m not saying that that second example applies in your case. I’m just saying that is one possible interpretation that would come to my mind upon seeing that someone had voluntarily listed their preferred pronouns. I’m just trying to explain why I find the whole thing a bit confusing, but I appreciate your explanation.

I’m anticipating this is one of those things that no matter what I do it isn’t right.

Sorry if I’m feeding into this perception. Again, I appreciate your explanation.

 

[kill051]

Language doesn’t really “de-evolve”. It shifts and moves.

Ah, I see. Thank you for clarifying your prior remark.

 

[Paul71]

English lacking a for a neutral pronoun is quite a lack, it’s a lacuna.

I was taught in school that “he” and “him” should be used when a singular, gender-neutral, personal pronoun is needed, and I have never seen anything wrong with this usage. This usage is less common than it once was, but I still see it and use it sometimes, and it does not sound strange to me. I consider it to be a bit like how in Spanish, the masculine plural form of a noun or a pronoun can refer to either a group of males or a mixed group of males and females, but the feminine plural form can refer only to a group of all females.

Having said that, I don’t object if people use “they” or “them” as gender-neutral singular pronouns. I use these pronouns in this way in my own speech and writing, though I try to avoid this usage in formal writing. I don’t particularly like this usage, but it has become acceptable in modern English. (For example, I believe that a major style guide recently approved they/them as singular gender-neutral pronouns.)

 

[Bruised_Reed]

why a person would choose to list gender pronouns (e.g., she/her/hers) rather than just listing sex/gender

Knowing my gender doesn’t tell you if I prefer gender neutral pronouns.

ideologically loaded (as in, "biologically I’m a male, but I want to be referred to as “she”)

I don’t see that as ideologically loaded. I want to know what pronouns a trans person wants used for them. It’s a simple thing, like knowing a person didn’t like being called Jimmy growing up and wanted to be called Jim, but now embraces being called Jimmy so that’s what I call him.

listing the pronouns seems to me a bit condescending (as in, “I don’t trust you to know the right pronoun to use if I only tell you my sex, so I’m going to really spell it out for you

I know of a woman named James and another named Douglas and personally know five people named Dana and four named Jordan so I think it’s useful, not remotely condescending.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

That’s a good idea.

 

[Alex337]

Alex337:

English lacking a for a neutral pronoun is quite a lack, it’s a lacuna.

I was taught in school that “he” and “him” should be used when a singular, gender-neutral, personal pronoun is needed, and I have never seen anything wrong with this usage. This usage is less common than it once was, but I still see it and use it sometimes, and it does not sound strange to me. I consider it to be a bit like how in Spanish, the masculine plural form of a noun or a pronoun can refer to either a group of males or a mixed group of males and females, but the feminine plural form can refer only to a group of all females.

Having said that, I don’t object if people use “they” or “them” as gender-neutral singular pronouns. I use these pronouns in this way in my own speech and writing, though I try to avoid this usage in formal writing. I don’t particularly like this usage, but it has become acceptable in modern English. (For example, I believe that a major style guide recently approved they/them as singular gender-neutral pronouns.)

Within the context of essays that used to be correct. But in everyday life, like if you didn’t know what sex a baby was yet for instance, it would be a tad presumptive. I also wish we had a neutral for uncle/aunt, we have cousin after all.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

I wonder what pronouns I should use?
(Just kidding)

 

[MikeInVA]

I had a (female) boss named Frankie. I also had a (male) employee named Frankie. It’s probably a good name to include your title in the signature block!

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I believe that a major style guide recently approved they/them as singular gender-neutral pronouns.

I’ve noted people talking about this sometime ago. It was actually a forum that attracted writers that convinced me singular they/them was okay to use; it wasn’t what I was taught but I was finding it increasingly necessary so I could maintain confidentiality at my job. Once I got “permission” I’ve used they/them more often then not. I will use she/her and he/him too when it seems like the better option.

 

[kill051]

I was taught in school that “he” and “him” should be used when a singular, gender-neutral, personal pronoun is needed, and I have never seen anything wrong with this usage. This usage is less common than it once was, but I still see it and use it sometimes, and it does not sound strange to me.

I also see nothing wrong with this usage. It is far less clumsy, stylistically speaking, than having to constantly write or say ‘he or she’ in order to avoid giving offense.

 

[Alex337]

A popular have series writes books using “she” as the catch all.

 

[Alex337]

For all people say the community wanting this take it too far the only time I see silly suggestions like this is from people who disagree with it, not the people who want their pronouns respected.

 

[JoyToTheWhirled]

JoyToTheWhirled:

I just find the whole thing mind-numbingly depressing. It’s like lots of things are being co opted to create a really oppressive monster. Language changes organically, this we know. It is only ever useful if it accurately describes things. Otherwise we might as well be in a world invented by Lewis Carroll.
It’s the wedge in the door that blocks out utter insanity. This isn’t organic natural language change. It’s social engineering.

It only feels oppressive because this time you’re the one expected to take another person into account.

I beg your pardon? It feels oppressive because I am being told, and my daughters are being told that our singularly biological experience as women is an irrelevance and must be subsumed by the feelings of people who have lived their entire lives with certain advantages, and now desire to access female spaces for their own validation, regardless of how actual biological women feel about it.
As a woman I have spent my entire life ‘taking others into account’. I have served men, I have served children,I have served other women. In amongst all this I have been extremely grateful to have been gifted with certain rights in God’s Providence - the right to be seen by a health care professional of my own sex, the right to access a shelter that will be single sex, the right to single sex spaces of many kinds and in many places.
And because a biological man decides that he has a lady brain, it is now decided that he can be called she and enter those spaces and I should just be polite and let him? Because you feel comfortable with it, so every other woman has to give up her rights? I think you rather presume too much with your free and easy gifting of other people’s rights.
I don’t mind being polite. I’m English, it’s pretty hard wired in me. But I will not collude in a lie which is feeding delusions and putting women and girls at risk.
‘Expected to take another person into account’? Welcome to the new boss, the same as the old boss.

(If this comes across as angry, then it should, because I am. Thoroughly fed up with the gaslighting, lies and distortions I have seen pushed these past few months.)

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I think I found it. How interesting!

 

[Alex337]

Alex337:

JoyToTheWhirled:

I just find the whole thing mind-numbingly depressing. It’s like lots of things are being co opted to create a really oppressive monster. Language changes organically, this we know. It is only ever useful if it accurately describes things. Otherwise we might as well be in a world invented by Lewis Carroll.
It’s the wedge in the door that blocks out utter insanity. This isn’t organic natural language change. It’s social engineering.

It only feels oppressive because this time you’re the one expected to take another person into account.

I beg your pardon? It feels oppressive because I am being told, and my daughters are being told that our singularly biological experience as women is an irrelevance and must be subsumed by the feelings of people who have lived their entire lives with certain advantages, and now desire to access female spaces for their own validation, regardless of how actual biological women feel about it.
As a woman I have spent my entire life ‘taking others into account’. I have served men, I have served children,I have served other women. In amongst all this I have been extremely grateful to have been gifted with certain rights in God’s Providence - the right to be seen by a health care professional of my own sex, the right to access a shelter that will be single sex, the right to single sex spaces of many kinds and in many places.
And because a biological man decides that he has a lady brain, it is now decided that he can be called she and enter those spaces and I should just be polite and let him? Because you feel comfortable with it, so every other woman has to give up her rights? I think you rather presume too much with your free and easy gifting of other people’s rights.
I don’t mind being polite. I’m English, it’s pretty hard wired in me. But I will not collude in a lie which is feeding delusions and putting women and girls at risk.
‘Expected to take another person into account’? Welcome to the new boss, the same as the old boss.

(If this comes across as angry, then it should, because I am. Thoroughly fed up with the gaslighting, lies and distortions I have seen pushed these past few months.)

Cool. I volunteer that the next transwoman can have my pronoun. I was born female and I gift it to them freely. They’re taking nothing from you, they can have mine.

 

[Alex337]

It’s nice to vary things.

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Physically? No. Now, I do tend to feel unfaithful to the truth, and conscious of betraying fidelity to it in exchange for men’s approval. Please give my best wishes to “Squish!” I must say, though, that if his nickname weren’t merely whimsical, if it were calculated to make me assent to some sort of basic falsity, and if I knew his actual name, I’d have to go with the latter. That’d be a pretty weird scenario, though.

 

[Alex337]

Physically? No. Now, I do tend to feel unfaithful to the truth, and conscious of betraying fidelity to it in exchange for men’s approval. Please give my best wishes to “Squish!” I must say, though, that if his nickname weren’t merely whimsical, if it were calculated to make me assent to some sort of basic falsity, and if I knew his actual name, I’d have to go with the latter. That’d be a pretty weird scenario, though.

It’s not just mens approval. Plenty of people who I suspect you would class as women go by non feminine pronouns. And they honestly don’t care about you, it’s about their comfort, not some calculated attempt to discomfort you.

Squish is a lass