Isn't preferred pronouns kind of orthogonal to the rest of the stuff? It has nothing to do with attempting to ensure representation and is instead about addressing a person in the manner of their choosing, akin to asking a woman if she prefers Ms, Miss, Mme, Mrs, etc.

I expect it's probably way more appropriate in most contexts to directly ask a person what their preferred pronouns are than to ask what their gender identity is; the pronouns are what you actually need and this way you're finding them out with certainty rather than trying to guess based on some internal gender->pronoun mapping table.

Pronouns are merely virtue signaling acts of control. By specifying pronouns if they are obvious (99% of the time) you are signaling you are part of a non-bigoted, non-hateful club. Surely you don’t hate people right? So why don’t you have your pronouns visible, fellow citizen?

It’s also a form of control in redefining the obvious. You want to just live your life? Nope, sorry, you need to consciously be aware of my preferred pronouns at all times. It’s a very narcissistic and attention seeking thing too.

>by specifying pronouns if they are obvious (99% of the time)

Except they aren't obvious 99% of the time. They aren't even "obvious" like 60% of the time. They aren't even "obvious 99% of the time" for cis-straight (non-LGBTQ) folks.

"Hi, Sam Shepard will be on the call with you today, and will be joined by Alex VanBeckran and Kegan Marton" -- are these folks hoping to be addressed as men, or women, or non-binary? There's no way to tell, and it's kind of disrespectful to be wrong.

> It’s also a form of control in redefining the obvious.

Form of control? What on earth? It's literally just a tiny amount of human dignity. It's basically no different than being asked to address someone as "Mr. / Ms. / Mrs. / Mx." from decades prior.

> Nope, sorry, you need to consciously be aware of my preferred pronouns at all times.

It takes literally almost no extra effort, you just file it along with their name (or phone number, or timezone, etc). If you are thinking that hard about it, your probably doing it wrong.

> "Hi, Sam Shepard will be on the call with you today, and will be joined by Alex VanBeckran and Kegan Marton" -- are these folks hoping to be addressed as men, or women, or non-binary? There's no way to tell, and it's kind of disrespectful to be wrong.

As another commenter pointed out, in a professional setting you would ideally address these people by their proper nouns (names) and not by their pronouns. And if you're addressing more than one person, it's the gender-neutral we/they/them anyways.

I'm actually struggling to think of a business scenario where using the proper pronoun would be more professional or polite than just using someone's given name.

> I'm actually struggling to think of a business scenario where using the proper pronoun would be more professional or polite than just using someone's given name.

It works at first to just always use names and theys, but the longer a conversation goes on, the more awkward little nooks and crannies you find where it sure would be convenient to have a third-person singular pronoun for referencing the thing the person just said as you expand on it or synthesizing between statements made by multiple other participants. Maybe each one individually has a solution, but the cumulative effect of these small hitches and inefficiencies does build up.

Anyway, it's not impossible to make this feel natural, of course, and some people put in the work to master it. But there's a reason To Kill A Mockingbird stands out as a book that almost completely conceals the gender of its narrator and main character until about halfway through the story.

I don't know about everyone else but I've been using non-gendered pronouns my entire life. I was taught words like "they" and "them" in first or second grade. At this point I just assume anyone bothered by this is the actual narcissist.

> They/them is extremely unnatural in American English to refer to a singular person who you’ve seen in person. It requires mental effort and it’s just plain silly.

They/them is almost always appropriate english when the gender of the person being spoken of is unknown. They only change in thinking required is to let go of the assumption that you can determine someone's gender from looking at them or reading their name.

Are you saying that anyone nonbinary should get therapy to get over the idea of being nonbinary?

I have been tempted to enter "bun/bunself" and show up with rabbit ears. That has made its way into the "real and valid" category.

Being asked them on a form alongside other obviously-related info is a very different thing from being pressured to make them part of your Slack username or Twitter bio.

Yes, there's arguments both ways that broadcasting them may be virtue-signalling, but I don't think it ever is to ask someone what theirs are, especially on something like a form.

It's just an extension of using someone's name. Is that virtue signaling, too? Or is the problem really that it's new and scary?

I frequently use pronouns for people whose names I have no interest in knowing, so it's definitely an extension. I just think it's an onerous one.

This. The crowd that replaced suits and ties with jeans and t-shirts are now nervous that someone is coming along to upend their status quo of culture and norms and they don't much like the idea.

The people who fought against the changes in dress codes claimed jeans and t's had all manner of impact on the professional setting of the workplace.

Is it really an imposition, when your profession includes declaring what OS you're using so you can create usable bug reports, to declare your pronouns on some form somewhere?

No, preferred pronouns are like he/him, she/her, they/them. These pronouns are only used when other people are talking about you. In most contexts it’s considered rude for people to talk about you like you’re not even there. So in fact, the only time your pronouns should be used is when people are talking about you and you’re not present!

>asking a woman if she prefers Ms, Miss, Mme, Mrs

This was at one point a controversial topic. Conservatives objected to the new construct of neutral meaning "Ms" and feminists objected to "Miss" and "Mrs" because they indicated marital status. The argument being that viewing a woman's name with those titles was reducing her to an object who's worth was determined by if she was available or not to men.

There was a controversy, but the controversy was never over whether it was appropriate to ask for your honorific on a form, just what the options should be. E.g. nobody thought it was weird to ask if you went by Dr.

I have a coworker who assigned “Lord” as his personal pronoun.

I always liked the idea of using “m’lud” or “y’excellency”.

It makes HR emails sound more subservient I think.

HR departments are famed for their sense of humour so I’m sure they’d be fine with it.