I mostly do it to clarify my position on things because I get grouped into the left winger or the right winger camp far too often.
But really for me my stance upon one informs my stance upon the others.
That's the main reason I use that signature.
People listing their preferred pronouns on LinkedIn....
- Thread starter The Tradition
- Start date
I mostly do it to clarify my position on things because I get grouped into the left winger or the right winger camp far too often.
But really for me my stance upon one informs my stance upon the others.
That's the main reason I use that signature.
You think a lot of this is a competition? Really? Again, here I am, someone who has lived all over the damn place in this country, who has more they/thems in my life than likely the rest of HROT combined, and rather than consider my info valid, you maintain your own ill-founded ideas.
Why? I ask this with absolute sincerity—why?
- Sep 13, 2002
- 96,035
- 197,043
- 113
They are getting the kids to "virtue signal" at a younger and younger age, though! 😂
I would say it's a better thing to just be a human and not go out of your way to try to make someone like you.
Again we are talking about saying something that has no function. And I don't think that again looking at this in the most trans friendly way that this sort of thing makes trans people feel more accepted for what they want to be. The way one could do that is by referring to them by their preferred pro-nouns etc.
Of course full disclosure I don't accept that they are what they want to be because I believe that there are some things that you can't just change about yourself. Your gender being among them.
The silly thing is everybody in a college class standing up and introducing themselves along with the pronoun. The people that want to use it -- a decent amount are probably doing it as a fad, nevertheless -- can do it, but that it's expected that everybody plays the game is silly.
Now if society evolved in a direction that really decoupled sex and gender identity -- I'm talking big percentages here -- then it might make sense include something like that in the prescribed list of items a person might recite about themselves in the example above. (again, I really doubt we evolve that way)
Basically... it's such a minority population interested in this that you shouldn't expect everybody to participate.
Last edited:
You literally just described why someone might choose to list pronoun preferences. Take a deep breath, Hoosier. Think.
My company (Fortune 500) has strongly suggested we all include our preferred pronouns in our email signature. In case you were wondering Trad this directive came from HR, not the diversity team.
I am not participating in the suggestion but could see it becoming a mandate down the road. In all truth, in the increasingly digital world, it may actually be helpful for me to include him/his in my signature. My first name is one that crosses genders but most people, going in blind, assume I am female based on my first name. Obviously when we meet or talk it becomes obvious, but for relationships that started over email, where someone assumed female, that first phone call or face to face meeting is uncomfortable (for them) as they know they have made a bad assumption and quite likely used the wrong pronouns in earlier communications.
It makes no difference to me, I have gotten used to it over the last 30 years of email, but having a potential customer, looking to make a 6 or 7 figure purchase, uncomfortable is never a great way to start a sales pitch.
I am not participating in the suggestion but could see it becoming a mandate down the road. In all truth, in the increasingly digital world, it may actually be helpful for me to include him/his in my signature. My first name is one that crosses genders but most people, going in blind, assume I am female based on my first name. Obviously when we meet or talk it becomes obvious, but for relationships that started over email, where someone assumed female, that first phone call or face to face meeting is uncomfortable (for them) as they know they have made a bad assumption and quite likely used the wrong pronouns in earlier communications.
It makes no difference to me, I have gotten used to it over the last 30 years of email, but having a potential customer, looking to make a 6 or 7 figure purchase, uncomfortable is never a great way to start a sales pitch.
Lol. Bro, do some reading. You're displaying dictionary definition bigotry here, Hoosier. It is pretty clear to me you have formed opinions you care neither to challenge nor change, opinions apparently formed with little to no interaction with folks who live in the gender gray areas, so to speak.
Don't be bigoted, Hoosier. Please. It is not hard to learn about this stuff.
Somebody made the very obvious observation the other day that politics is in everything. We should probably stop that.
It's sort of weird... the lines between academic stuff, activism, politics and pop-culture are becoming really blurred. I think it's the information age we live in, mostly. Something like CNN is a great example, a lot of their stuff anymore is politically targeted jargony of the moment culturally hot topic stuff that isn't that smart. I'm not used to reading stuff like that. It's like you'll get some truths in the piece but then some WTFs and big glaring omissions... from the perspective of producing a really thoughtful piece on X topic. I guess what irks me is when stuff like that parades around as really smart stuff when just... not.
I'm just not sure we're better off for that, even when the piece does hit on some truths, some salient considerations. Maybe that's one reader group getting smarter... while another becomes dumber. I don't know.
Man, this last paragraph:
Reading this again, Hoosier, this is truly beneath you. You're such a better person than this. I mean, really, is this very Christian? Like core Jesus-teachings Christian?
That paragraph is pretty disappointing, Hoosier.
Reading this again, Hoosier, this is truly beneath you. You're such a better person than this. I mean, really, is this very Christian? Like core Jesus-teachings Christian?
That paragraph is pretty disappointing, Hoosier.
Yeah, IMHO it's hard to differentiate doing "manly" things vs. the psychological need to be manly as it relates to toxic masculinity.
You can do a lot of hunting, shooting, and sports without feeding an innate desire to dominate those around you. But make no mistake for someone that psychologically has been conditioned to demonstrate power, those manly things can and are valuable tools to dominate and effeminize others. And if you happen to enjoy those activities too, win-win!
The pronoun thing (or any other perceived wokeness because A LOT of wokeness is feelings-based) is just a micro activity that threatens the macro view. But as I said, it threatens the concept because being about feelings, it shows weakness.
Because again doing so has no practical application.
You are dressed like a woman, you look like a woman, you sound like a woman and you act like a woman. NO ONE IS CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT GENDER YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF..
This happens all of the time with groups like the left . . . and the right. . . and Christians and god knows how many other groups (Probably thanks in part to the internet). You get a subset of people within that group that go more and more to the extreme for no practical purpose other than to show off to others how dedicated they are to whatever causes that group is backing. So the left backs the idea that gender is fluid so you have people that want to prove themselves better and more dedicated than the rest of them so they go around telling people their preferred pro-nouns. Or worse they invent a made up gender in their heads and change to some made up pro-nouns just so everyone will know how freaking dedicated they are to the idea that gender is fluid.
The right wing is dedicated to the idea that guns are a right and should not be restricted. So every right wing nut out there is determined to show everyone their vast arsenal of different guns just so they can show everyone how dedicated they are to the idea that guns shouldn't be restricted. You have gun nuts out there who own like 15 different AR-15's . . . You can only shoot one at a time!!! But just got to show everyone how dedicated they are to the "right" to own AR-15's that they insist on buying 15 different ones.
It's the same damn game played out in different groups.
I couldn't care less...just attempting to clarify Trad's "issue". It's an issue that impacts 0.6% of the U.S. population, but is the topic of well over 50%. It is what it is.
I thought it was spot on. I'm not judging someone who wants to be something different from what they are. I'm just saying that I don't believe you can be that just cause you want to be.
CNN/Fox/etc have a market to satisfy. Until the market truly demands otherwise, stop consuming it, and stop complaining.
If some restaurant you frequent keeps declining in quality, you complain for a bit until you don't—because you just stop going.
So stop going.
There are alternatives, you know.
Not sure I understand why. My name is in my signature. If someone called me a "she" or "her" I would first think, "not sure why they would think I am a female with my name, but whatever" and then proceed on with life not giving a damn. But then again, I am not an attention whoring dumbass who gets upset or pretends to get upset by trivial matters in the name of attention whoring.
Oh good lord. Are you really going to solidify your unbending opinion on this by maintaining that you're forming it by looking at it through a left/right lens? Really?
Come on, Hoosier.
This could be it.
Back to pronouns: I’ve had this conversation with my 20-something kids, and while I agree that everyone should be called what & how they want to be, it shouldn’t be a guessing game or some sort of pronoun Go Fish, where I’m an insensitive jerk if I guess wrong. So I’m happy that folks are putting this in their social media profiles.
As long as they tolerate the occasional slip up by this 50-something dinosaur who is at least making an effort.
Dis-acceptance feels pretty judg-y to me, Hoosier.
And your second sentence, there, is a super-clear demonstration of your ignorance on this stuff. And yet, you care not to ask for more info. You care not to seek it out. In other words, you care not to challenge your own opinions.
Disappointing.
Here's a suggestion: people could "signal" their gender by putting "Mr." or "Ms." in front of their name instead of "(she/her)" or "(he/him)" after the name. What's wrong with that? Too old-fashioned? Not woke enough?
No I just see the same game happening in different groups and it's crazy. And quite frankly that's why the world has gotten as crazy as it is. At least half the population isn't just people anymore, they are living breathing agents of one cause or another and a significant portion of their thoughts and lives seem focused on that.
The right is certainly the craziest and the most harmfully crazy of all of them. As stupid as I think it is, defining your pro-nouns for everyone with pretty benign. Stupid but benign. Same thing with changing your gender. . . with the minor exception of trans competing in women's sports, the idea is for the most part benign. And even the women's sports thing is going to hurt small numbers in ways that don't really last.
The right wants to cancel democracy out of dedication to their cult leader.
I just see it as the same effect. . . It's just that most of what liberals do is just kooky benign shit while conservatives try to cancel out democracy and talk about civil wars and killing people.
Last edited:
I don’t have a problem with that, but it probably opens up the Miss/Mrs./Ms. issue in a way that goes over my head. And what is the neutral honorific? Is there one?
(Edit - so apparently it’s “Mx.”, but I don’t think that has caught on. Pretty cool, tho.)
As someone with many they/thems and the like in my life, I can promise you that "slip-ups" are fully tolerated.
The theys and thems and such, my fairly extensive experience is that they're fully aware that accepting them presents challenges for people. Remember, their self-acceptance requires/required LOTS OF WORK usually over MANY YEARS if not THEIR ENTIRE LIFETIME.
Think of it. Most of America is probably somewhat similar to Hoosier, who is here openly dis-accepting them. Remember when you liked a girl and you met her dad or family for the first time? And you had a little anxiety maybe over being "accepted"? Imagine feeling that with nearly every interaction in your life, including your interaction with your own reflection in the mirror.
I don’t care if people list pronouns but I won’t ever bother doing it.
I think the opposite is true. . . people expect me to not just tolerate their worldview (which I can do) but join in on their worldview.
Which means that they lack the acceptance of MY worldview.
Oh, brother. This world is so much bigger than your little left/right "crazy world" crap. I keep inviting you to challenge your opinions, you keep avoiding. What are you scared of, Hoosier?
Lol. Who is asking you to join in? Seriously, who? And how? Give me an example of your being asked to "join in". Please.
I really do believe it is at the root of many problems. The problem is, you're still rewarded very handsomely in today's world in MANY circles for demonstrating the tenants of toxic masculinity. Dominate your competitors, show no weakness, feelings are for cowards, win at all costs, losers are wimps, project virility in all phases of life.
That shit gets you raises, bonuses, 3rd homes, fast cars, and fast women.
Pronouns? F that feelings BS, that's for the woke pussies.
Cigarette stench is more offensive than someone clarifying a pronoun.
If you are asking me to refer to a man who has transitioned into a woman as a woman you are asking me to join into their worldview and abandon my own worldview that gender is concrete.
That's actually a lack of tolerance for my world view.
Eh, I pick on CNN because they used to be my sort middle of the road everyman's news source. Just something you set your homepage to. So it's been interesting watching them evolve. I think they make a nice soulless bellwether.
And yeah, obviously they've been heavily compromised playing the game of staying market place relevant. I think, IIRC, it was 2015 or so that overnight they just seemed to go flat out sensationalistic with their front page stuff.
My information stream pulls from a bunch of different buckets, which is about the only way to do it anymore lest you end up with some big blind spots.
I think with this you have the earnest people, who I have no trouble with, and those that are just sort of playing around. And that's where I say fad. You know the 70+ plus pronouns or whatever it is we're up to now. Yeah, we can't expect people to stay up on that. They'll matriculate into our everyday language if they ever become popular enough.
They have, and they have always been using incorrect grammar and I found it as irritating then as I do now. But to be clear, I find the misuse of grammar irritating, not the idea that people want to be inclusive.
Honestly, why do you care so much? You get hung up on the dumbest shit. But if Chis posts about Jan. 6th or GQP desecrations, you are totally indifferent.
Maybe you should just save everyone a lot of time and just admit you're a bigoted asshole instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel to substantiate a point that is intellectually deficient and very snowflakey.
1) You're functioning from ignorance, Hoosier. Your "worldview" is informed by stubborn ignorance. If bigotry—which is what, by definition, this is—is your worldview, well, fine, I guess.
2) A man who has transitioned into a woman didn't do so to change your worldview. They did so to be their most authentic self. You should really study up on gender vs sex, Hoosier. Hell, read the Time article about Elliot Page, if you want to take a pop culture approach on this.
3) About worldview as a general concept… Is it your opinion or feeling that a person's worldview should, at some point, remain fixed and unchanging? Or is it your opinion or feeling that a person's worldview is a constantly-evolving thing, accepting new information, accepting challenges to previously-held perceptions or ideas? If it's the former, well, we should just stop our interactions right here. If it's the latter, prove it.
I can't believe people set their homepage to something like CNN. Holy shit. And people do this with Fox News? Or even Yahoo?! No wonder we're such a dumb ass country.
1. I don't agree but if that's what you want to call it fine.
2. I don't think they do it to change my worldview. I think they do it because they feel for some reason or another that they were not born in the right gender. They have their own personal reasons. It's just my world view that doing something like this is crazy. It's a denial of reality.
3. I don't think worldview should be fixed and unchanging. I just have not been convinced by anything to change my worldview that one's gender is something that can be changed.
I'm a man because I was born with and continue to have male parts. That's just the reality of it all. People's feelings don't really affect that. My feelings don't affect that.
King Charles VI felt as though he was made of glass. We say that's because he was crazy. But when a man goes and tells people that he feels as though he's a woman . . . we don't say that's crazy we say "No you are right!!"
Odd take to think a home page shouldn't be a news source.
Mine's MSN, which has a conglomerate of left and right articles, customized by topic, financial holdings and also linked to hotmail with one click.
What's an "accepted" homepage?
Last edited:
