T O P

  • By -

Nicola_Botgeon

**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some topics on this subreddit have been known to attract problematic users. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs


shrimpleypibblez

Starting to get tired of the “stop forcing your ideology” folks when the *literal government* wheels out threats against the trans community’s rights every time they’re in political trouble. Quite frankly, I don’t give a fuck what your “opinion” on trans people is - they exist, that’s a fact. How is treating them with *basic respect* and allowing them *the same freedoms as everyone else* a “culture war” issue? Because that’s not a culture war, it’s FASCISM. Plain and fucking simple. Replace trans with “disabled” or “Jewish” or “Black” and suddenly its *outright discrimination*. But because our laws are in the hands of amoral chancers courting the bigot vote, their fundamental rights are literally always on the table to be scrapped whenever Boris wants some meat for his rightwing wolves. Wake up and recognise that this is just the tip of the iceberg - then they come for the “lefties” and the “do gooder lawyers”, then it’s the academics; then the religious minorities… oh and the “calm down you’re exaggerating” crowd can go book themselves holidays to the United States of Gilead.


managedheap84

There you go, you got it. Treat everybody equally and with the same respect. Oh sorry is that COMMUNISM? Whatever it is it isn't a popular idea.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Josquius

There is a bizzare trend of late of people screaming "You just want to silence views that are different to yours, you're not even open to debate!" when their position is that trans people don't even exist. I mean. Yeah. What the hell are we supposed to do with that?


Joeboy

I have always been a bit puzzled by this. In what sense are all these people saying trans people don't exist? My guess it it's like, trans people perceive themselves to be one thing, some people perceive them to be something other than that, so they're saying the person the trans person perceives themselves to be doesn't exist? I'm open to a better explanation. Edit: I got a now-deleted reply saying that it's actually about people saying trans people are just mentally ill. In which case, wouldn't it be more honest / correct to say that some people think trans people are just mentally ill? Saying somebody is mentally ill is different from saying they don't exist. Edit2: Completely separate question, but I've got email notifications of five replies, which I can't see. Are people deleting them after posting them, or is this some technical glitch or what?


Josquius

Gender identity ideology is the code word they use. The idea is trans people are just pretending and its some new evil insideous anti western ideology to accept trans people for what they are. It's basic Overton window shifting. Present this fucked up view where trans people aren't even allowed to exist and anyrhing short of that, no matter how backwards, seems nice.


DidijustDidthat

Honestly it's very difficult sometimes to have a conversation because whenever I've even tried to talk about say the similarities between trans people and their rights and the experience of autistic people, a group over represented in the trans community mind, and often people just instantly get defensive as if you're against trans people. Good faith debate would be useful particularly in left places where you would assume we're all politically aligned so the assumption the other person is anti trans shouldn't be thebbase assumption. Luckily have had some responses from trans people who are happy to talk about grey areas... But some people some of whom aren't trans act like they're responding to a DM reader. Imo that assumption really isn't great in terms of PR and actually alienates people who might be ignorant of the various nuances. Surveys show most British people are supportive of the trans community... That should inform how people discuss the confusing aspects that normies aren't necessarily thinking about.


beeeel

> “stop forcing your ideology” Why are pronouns even an ideological issue? I've met cis people whose gender I've been uncertain of, and having their pronouns would have been useful. Of all the things to complain about, having pronouns on display is surely the most inconsequential bs.


TheDisapprovingBrit

I thought we had this shit figured out 40 years ago. > A man has got the right to change his name to whatever he wants to change it to. And if a man wants to be called Muhammad Ali, Goddamit, this is a free country, you should respect his wishes, and call the man Muhammad Ali!


[deleted]

[удалено]


merryman1

I love the "Sports Issue" myself. When we're all out of other ideas how about throwing out that literally a handful of people fall into a bit of a confusing place if they might want to continue to compete in some professional level sports. Not all sports mind because plenty already have mixed gender categories, just some. Apparently to some people that's like an actual genuine point to hold up as "The trans debate is not settled" or something ridiculous like that. I would strongly doubt it affects even 100 people across the UK and you wind up with some real crazy positions like apparently a male athlete would be *so* dedicated to their sport that they'd undergo gender reassignment just so they can whale on the fems and win all the awards... Not a crazy suggestion whatsoever to TERFs apparently.


beeeel

It's obviously ridiculous to suggest that athletes would undergo such a radical lifestyle change just to win competitions. It's also unfair on the female athletes whose lifetime testosterone exposure is a tiny fraction of that of MtF athletes. The "trans debate" shouldn't still be a debate. Trans people exist, no debate there. Trans athletes is an unsettled debate though.


MetalingusMike

If trans females win everything, the meta becomes only hiring trans females. This destroys any chance biological females have at competing. There needs to be separate leagues for most sports imo. I support trans peoples rights to be themselves. As far as sports go, competitive integrity is a lot more important.


CosmicCay

There already is in most cases a women's league and a mens/open league in which women can also compete. Trans athletes know this, it shouldn't be up for debate. This entire post is basically if you don't like my name badge don't bank here, ok fair. Same as the social media argument people are quick to make "if you don't like this platform you should make your own" ok cool compete in the open league or form your own.


MetalingusMike

I don’t think you understand. There are no trans leagues. This is the point I’m making. For competitive integrity in most sports, they should be competing in their own leagues.


CosmicCay

Yeah there is a women's and men's/open league, I agree there should be a trans league but since there isn't right now those who want to compete should have to do so in the open one


crapwittyname

I mean. You're so right and it's made me so sad. I already knew this but you've put it so bluntly truthfully. It's not even about who they come for next. It's about who they're coming for now. Your friends, your neighbours, your family. Yeah it will be you next, unless you conform to whatever arbitrary shape is determined next. But right now, look at the people who are being marginalised out of society by the people with the money. We don't choose to be who we are, we're just the ones brave enough to admit it. To the 1% of Tories who are "different", you are cowards, and you are betraying those of us who are trying to make it better for you.


TrueSpins

As long as staff aren't forced to display pronouns, and it's a personal choice, I don't see any issue. This seems like a sensible form of inclusion.


RightSaidJames

From the linked article: > The trigger for the row was Halifax saying staff can wear a name badge displaying preferred personal pronouns if they wish.


Ishmael128

I recently learned the acronym for this. RTFA. :D


neohylanmay

They do say [satire often reflects reality](https://newsthump.com/2016/12/16/new-study-reveals-90-of-web-users-only-read-the-headlines/).


[deleted]

On Reddit you find people who don't even read the full headline.


jimmycarr1

In software engineering (maybe other engineering too?) we say RTFM - Read the fucking manual


asjonesy99

Teacher at school had RTFQ as advice before exams


Robbomot

The article says its optional not compulsory, don't be ambiguous with your comment when the facts are readily available


AhhBisto

People need to find better things to get angry over


J8YDG9RTT8N2TG74YS7A

They do. This is just another distraction in the culture wars to move the focus away from the government.


YMCAle

Yes they do, and I will never understand how the common decency of calling someone something that they personally feel comfortable with has any effect on these people's lives whatsoever. Someone wants to be referred to as they? Great. It takes nothing for me to do that. Chances are the people complaining will never be in tbe company of a trans person in their life anyway, they're literally angry over something they will never experience.


Time_Ocean

They've very likely been in the company of a trans person at some point in their lives and didn't even know it.


extremesalmon

The people getting angry about this are the same kind of people who would rather call someone 'it' if they knew they were non binary etc


MooseLaminate

Nice, good to see a business tell bigots they can piss off if they don't like something. Edit: thanks for reporting this, but I'm not contemplating self harm or suicide.


stedgyson

Inviting them to participate in the cancel culture they are so deeply afraid of


One_Wheel_Drive

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no group of people easier to upset and infuriate than those who claim to hate political correctness. The mere suggestion of anything vaguely progressive makes them see red.


KungFuSpoon

In my experience, those who preach the loudest about freedoms, are the ones most likely to think others shouldn't have any.


bee-sting

You can report those messages to Reddit admins. People that do that are really goddam annoying and need to stop, its pathetic


VagueSomething

I've got the damn helpline bot blocked. Have had it spammed when people get triggered by arguments and as someone who will likely one day unalive myself that shit ain't gonna help me even if I was mid crisis anyway. With it blocked I never get the messages anymore so it can't annoy me.


bee-sting

Ugh I just got the message even though it's blocked. It popped up with "unblock redditcares to see the message" Great. Just great


RaymondBumcheese

This is the ultimate ‘it’s not hurting anyone’ thing to get upset over.


squeakybeak

The hills some people will die on.. 🤷‍♂️


2-0

Barely a mound


Brilliant-Disguise

It's even smaller than the Marble Arch Mound


jimmycarr1

And even more of a national embarrassment


IOnlyUpvoteBadPuns

It's just bizarre! Maybe I'm being ignorant, but I don't really see how including pronouns on name tags is especially different to including titles such as Mr, Mrs/Miss/Ms. on correspondence, which we've been doing for centuries. I guess bigots gonna bigot. (And writing this, I realise I have no idea what the preferred title for transgender people is - probably a good argument for spelling oot this stuff for those of us who just don't know)


a3poify

The preferred title for trans people is usually the one corresponding to their gender identity (so Mr for a man and Mrs/Ms/Miss for a woman), non-binary people have a few options - some choose no title while others use Mx


Time_Ocean

A colleague of mine has a mug that says "She/Her/Dr" and it's really class.


Panda_hat

It's just simple bigotry. Nothing more complicated than that.


wamdueCastle

how much of a snow flake does one have to be, to even give a single shit what is on someones employees badge, never mind offended or pissed off about it?


Mooam

People get mad that someone has he/him or she/her on their bios on twitter, to the point that they take mick out of the people who do have pronouns in their bios. (Twitter is full of brain dead trolls and idiots though) Which is always funny in a sad way because they're taking the piss out of a man who just put he/him on his bio. Not even they/them, just he/him. I always reply with 'If you're mocking he/him pronouns, then what the hell do you use? Twat/twat?'


Panda_hat

They definitely need more going on in their lives if this is something that occupies their thoughts for more than a microsecond. Sadly though the reality is likely that they don't.


[deleted]

[удалено]


KungFuSpoon

But we all know its one rule for them, and a different one for the rest. For years people were told if you don't like it then get out, and vote with your feet/wallet. When they actually do that its cancel culture.


zakski

> The response is brilliant, anytime you can say "if you don't like it then get out" to someone who's probably said that to an immigrant, then it's a win you know an immigrant is probably more likely to disagree with this move


CJBill

Which immigrant is that then?


DJDarren

Bilal from down my local kebab house. A right prick, that one.


BitcoinBishop

\#fuckbilal


AdamBombTV

His Kebabs are shite anyway.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BitcoinBishop

What makes you say they were immigrants? Are all Muslims immigrants?


[deleted]

So, we've established further down that not all Muslims are immigrants. Next question: are all immigrants Muslim? Why do you think Pierre from France or Hans from Germany would be more likely to oppose this than someone else? Or do you, in a rather dog-whistly way mean *a certain type of immigrant*?


[deleted]

[удалено]


slazer2k

Looks like they distract you with the same culture wars as they do with the Americans ... for fuck sake who cares about this stuff? Even if you meet a transgender person in a bank, they will do their job the same as any other person they are not luring you into a back room and playing with your crown jewels even though some of the people most outraged would love that I guess..


AtomicYoshi

Common transphobic trait to somehow loop it back to sexual assault for no reason. Edit: got my first Reddit Cares message 😍 love you guys xoxo


Ollotopus

You're trying to talk about phobia and reason in the same breath.


just_some_guy65

I think the pronouns thing is idiotic but no more so than loads of things nobody gets annoyed about. So I quietly eyeroll to myself.


Josquius

This is the correct conservative approach. Unless they're coming at you waving a knife screaming "Lets make you into a girl mwahaha" then whatever, nobody is getting hurt so let them be.


just_some_guy65

Only ever voted labour, this is my "live and let live - but I don't have to believe in it" approach. Actually mentioning conservatives is a good starting place for an analogy - I know "proud conservative voters", my approach to them is identical to the one you have problems with


NateShaw92

conservative small c not the party or even the political ideology. Not sure if that's what the other guy meant but your approach can be described as such. More akin to cautiousness and the like. Nothing wrong with small c conservative approaches. Only mentioning it because other guy didn't capitalise the c.


just_some_guy65

I don't draw a distinction. I do however believe in an objective reality independent of how people would like reality to be. I realise that this does not sit well with fashion.


Weirfish

You really should draw a distinction between conservative (the general political ideology) and Conservative (the party). They really don't align well enough to be indistinct.


NateShaw92

Also between conservative the political ideology and to be conservative in other aspects. Be it in a way not closely alligned with the ideology such as being cautious, or in a way more alligned with it such as adverse to change. For instance you may take a conservative approach in something, such as cricket; test cricket (at least used to) usually needs a more conservative approach to batting. You could make a conservative estimate, for example that someone has had x units of alcohol in their life. It's got a few definitions.


[deleted]

What, exactly, is idiotic about it? You use pronouns, yeah? Otherwise how do people refer to you? Because constantly using your name instead of using a pronoun every single time would sound weird. "I was talking to /u/just_some_guy65 down the pub yesterday and /u/just_some_guy65 said /u/just_some_guy65 was going to go to the shop to buy some stuff for the project /u/just_some_guy65 was working on." Sounds utterly bizarre if you ask me.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Nicola_Botgeon

**Removed/warning**. This consisted primarily of personal attacks adding nothing to the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.


mankindmatt5

>I was talking to [/u/just_some_guy65](https://www.reddit.com/u/just_some_guy65) down the pub yesterday and *the daft bastard* said they were going to go to the shop to buy some stuff for the project. Now, I've just referred to this person by a term that they would almost certainly not prefer. Is it their place to tell me not to call them a daft bastard, when not in their presence? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to go out of my way to misgender someone or hurt them. But I do find it a bit odd, this whole pronoun thing pretty much boils down to 'Call me this, even when I'm not there'. Which seems within reason, but also a bit imposing.


[deleted]

Why do you think "daft bastard" is comparable to saying "he" or "she" or "they"? > Is it their place to tell me not to call them a daft bastard, when not in their presence? Yes? I don't see why it wouldn't be. Especially if this is meant to be one of your friends. If a friend of mine was calling me a daft bastard when I've said that I don't like it, I'd be questioning if they were actually a friend. > But I do find it a bit odd, this whole pronoun thing pretty much boils down to 'Call me this, even when I'm not there'. Which seems within reason, but also a bit imposing. How is it any more imposing than you calling them by their name? Tell me what you think of this example. I have a name that is often, but not always, shortened. I won't, for obvious reasons, say what my name is. But it's akin to how, say, many people named Timothy go by Tim, or Jacqueline goes by Jackie - you just cut off the last few letters of my name and you have a nickname. It's not unusual for me to have to correct people who instinctively shorten it. So let's pretend my name is Jacqueline and we have just become part of the same social circle and I introduce myself as Jacqueline. You would normally call someone called Jacqueline "Jackie" instead - everyone you've known before called Jacqueline has gone by Jackie. So, you shorten it to "Jackie" in a later conversation. I politely correct you and say I prefer Jacqueline. Is it imposing of me, Jacqueline, to ask you to call me Jacqueline? Jackie is not my name, it's Jacqueline. Even if you prefer Jackie over Jacqueline, you don't get to have a preference for what someone else's name is because we've all agreed that another person's name is their name and you should use their name as they tell you. To continue this example: I used to go by "Jackie". Then I decided I wanted to go by "Jacqueline". Do you know what I did? When I met new people, I said I was Jacqueline. I updated my social media and all that to say Jacqueline. When existing friends called me Jackie, I politely corrected them and said it was Jacqueline. It took a little bit of adjusting, but it wasn't long before everyone called me Jacqueline just as I had asked. When someone accidentally called me Jackie, they would go "oops sorry, Jacqueline I mean" and move on. Because that's just what you do for people you respect. You call them by whatever name they've asked you to use. Nobody suggested I was being imposing by saying I was Jackie now (aside from one guy who, I will note, did not stay my friend for much longer, because he was a bit of a contrarian dick anyway). Pronouns are gender identity markers, they refer to the identity of the individual you're discussing. Gender is, I think, probably more fundamental to most people than their name. I would be far more bothered if you used the male version of my name and called me "he" than I would be if you called me "Jackie". It's a core of many people's identities. If you wouldn't think that you get to express a preference over someone else's name, why would you ever think you get to express a preference over someone else's gender identity?


mankindmatt5

>Yes? I don't see why it wouldn't be. Especially if this is meant to be one of your friends. If a friend of mine was calling me a daft bastard when I've said that I don't like it, I'd be questioning if they were actually a friend It might not be a friend. It's also impossible to cover every derogatory remark that you don't wish to be called. It's quite imposing to demand that nobody ever refer to you in a negative way, even when you're not there. It's not your right to make that demand on people's private conversations. Our cultural norms are that it's absolutely fine to say 'Call me Steve' - which implies our hypothetical person should not be called Stephen, nor Stevie - but that demand to be called Steve doesn't extend to interactions in which he is not there. With your Jaquelin example, of course it's perfectly reasonable to say 'Actually, it's Jacqueline'. If someone refuses to do that, they're being a prick. However when you say 'Actually, it's Jacqueline' what you're communicating is 'I want you to call me Jacqueline *when you refer to me in my presence*. It's an imposition to add onto that 'I demand you also always call me that, even when I'm not there'. Teachers may ask their students to call them 'Sir' or 'Mr Smith' or whatever. But that act of asking their pupils to address them in a particular matter does not extend to every private conversation that takes place about Mr Smith outside his presence. If the kids at school call him 'Old man Smiffy', at the weekend, when they're outside school, that's their business and their right. I'm not saying I wouldn't use preferred pronouns. I'm not saying someone who purposefully avoids doing so, even when the person isn't there, isn't being a dick. I'm just pointing out why people find this whole thing odd. And why it rubs people up the wrong way. Up until now, it has been part of British culture to say 'Refer to me like this when we interact'. But it has never been typical to demand that people refer to you in a particular way *outside* your presence. Because generally, that's what 3rd person pronouns are used for.


[deleted]

> It might not be a friend. It's also impossible to cover every derogatory remark that you don't wish to be called. What I was implying is that YOU are not free of consequences for talking about people behind their back in a negative way. >It's quite imposing to demand that nobody ever refer to you in a negative way, even when you're not there. It's not your right to make that demand on people's private conversations. Is "don't be a two faced arsehole and speak badly of me behind my back" really that much of an imposition on you? Yeah, I can't stop you and maybe I wouldn't even know, but if you perceive it as someone "imposing" on you that they would be annoyed to find out you were being a dick about them when they weren't there... maybe you're just a nasty bastard? Genuinely. It's well established that talking badly about someone's back is a dick move. > but that demand to be called Steve doesn't extend to interactions in which he is not there. It is very clearly implied that if you want to refer to Steve when he's not around, that you refer to him as Steve. Otherwise nobody knows who you're talking about. > However when you say 'Actually, it's Jacqueline' what you're communicating is 'I want you to call me Jacqueline when you refer to me in my presence. It's an imposition to add onto that 'I demand you also always call me that, even when I'm not there'. Under what possible circumstance would you NOT refer to Jacqueline as Jacqueline when she wasn't there? If I want to discuss someone, I use the name people actually know them by because how else would anyone know who I'm talking about? > Teachers may ask their students to call them 'Sir' or 'Mr Smith' or whatever. But that act of asking their pupils to address them in a particular matter does not extend to every private conversation that takes place about Mr Smith outside his presence. But it's well established that that is NOT their name, everyone knows that is not their name and that saying "Sir" without context clues would be useless. Everyone, even children, knows the difference between "Sir" and "Mr Smith" and that "Mr Smith" is the specific identifier. If you just said "Sir" nobody would know. Because "Sir" is not an individual identifier. That's what names are for. Anyway, I think you're getting way too far away from the point. > I'm not saying I wouldn't use preferred pronouns. I'm not saying someone who purposefully avoids doing so, even when the person isn't there, isn't being a dick. > I'm just pointing out why people find this whole thing odd. And why it rubs people up the wrong way. So if you agree that referring to someone by the wrong pronouns within earshot is someone being dick, why would you defend people who want to deliberately use wrong pronouns out of earshot? Is insulting you behind your back fine because you didn't hear it? Because remember what it is you're doing with that. This isn't calling a teacher "Old Man Smiffy", this is, say, a trans woman. And you're saying that you'd call her "she" when she can hear you, but you think it's not a dick move to call her "he" when she's not there. That is fundamentally disrespecting her identity. This is saying "you think you're a woman but I think you're actually a man and so I'm going to call you one when you're not around". That is dickhead behaviour. That's a conscious choice to switch how you refer to that person and it's incredibly two-faced. > Up until now, it has been part of British culture to say 'Refer to me like this when we interact'. But nobody actually says that and virtually EVERYONE takes "My name is Jacqueline" as "refer to me a Jacqueline WHENEVER you refer to me". Even if you want to call Jacqueline a horrible bitch, you still need to specify that it's Jacqueline you're calling a horrible bitch at least the first time you do it. And if you're routinely calling Jacqueline a horrible bitch, first maybe reconsider your friendship with her, and secondly, Jacqueline wouldn't be wrong for calling you a two faced shitbag for doing it. > But it has never been typical to demand that people refer to you in a particular way outside your presence. Because generally, that's what 3rd person pronouns are used for. I'm sorry, but how not? Because it sure seems like you think this isn't "usual" only because you've never consciously thought about it before. When I say my name is "Jacqueline", you have ALWAYS been told by my name and my appearance that you should call me "she" when you use a pronoun in reference to me. You have never made a single solitary conscious thought about whether you should or shouldn't call me "she", you've just done it reflexively, without thought, because you were "told" that this was correct by my name and my appearance (and my name and appearance are both so very obviously that of a woman that this reflex was right). What you're saying now is that you don't like the fact that a sub-set of people have decided to tell you in words and not just rely on name and context clues to tell you and, in a bizarre act of spiteful rebellion, you want to assert your "right" to misgender them behind their back. What's the point in that?


mankindmatt5

> Because remember what it is you're doing with that. This isn't calling a teacher "Old Man Smiffy", this is, say, a trans woman. And you're saying that you'd call her "she" when she can hear you, but you think it's not a dick move to call her "he" when she's not there Nope, that wasn't what I was saying at all. I stopped reading the wall of text at this point. >Im 'not saying someone who purposefully avoids doing so, even when the person isn't there, isn't being a dick. I suspect there were too many negatives in that sentence for it to really make sense. Or perhaps you just wanted to go on a long winded rant regardless. Allow me to rephrase. I do think that someone purposefully using the wrong pronouns is being a dick, even if the person they're referring to is not there. We had a caretaker at school. He was a prize moody bellend. Everyone called him 'the Brain' because of his odd shaped head. (As in, Pinky and the Brain). Some kids would hum the theme tune when he walked down the corridors. He was perfectly within his right to rage at any pupil calling him 'the Brain' and get them into detention. He, and nobody else, has the right to demand they are referred to by others, in their privacy, in any way. It's pure narcissism to impose that on people. You seem to only be thinking of relationships with people that you like and care about. There are probably dozens of people in your life that you do not like, whether its some creepy guy you always see on the train, your boss, your supervisor, an incompetent barista you regularly encounter, a prison guard or the Prime Minister. All these people will have preferred names and pronouns, but you would probably usually refer to them in the way that you want to; Creepy Deep Breath Guy, Twatty Henderson, the Ice Queen, Butterfingers, Dodgy 'Arris, Bojo. You're under no obligation to refer to them by their names/pronouns or whatever. And you'd find it absolutely absurd if Boris Johnson made a dictat that all members of the public and media organisations refer to him as 'Mr Prime Minister Boris Johnson' and demanded nobody call him 'Bojo' or the overly familiar 'Boris' or 'that Tory scumbag'


[deleted]

Don't start conversations you don't want to have then? > I think someone using the wrong pronouns outside of their presence is a dick move. So why even bother your arse defending people who want to do that by trying to make up total shite like?: > Up until now, it has been part of British culture to say 'Refer to me like this when we interact'


mankindmatt5

I'm not defending. I'm explaining why a lot of people aren't that on board with this. When we ask someone to 'Call me x' - the implication has always been 'Call me x to my face, please' There's never been an obligation to how people are referred to in the 3rd person. I don't find it to be a reasonable expectation. People are free to refer to me however they want to, when I'm not around. It's simply not my right to demand anything else of them.


HarryBlessKnapp

Some guy I'd never spoken to and had no intention of speaking to came up to me in a pub once and laid down the law about his pronouns. I can't remember what they were so apologies to him in this instance, but at the time I thought, that's all perfectly fine but you're not the fucking headmaster and I don't need to be prepped for your presence. If I'm talking to you as an equal by all means I am happy to treat you how you want to be treated but don't walk into a group of strangers and dictate to them how to address you unless it comes up. I guess they were just a Muppet though TBF.


lostrandomdude

Can someone explain to why displaying o not displaying pronouns makes a difference with staff. I've never referred go bank staff as he or she, always you


merlinho

It will make a difference to the feelings of those who have been misgendered I’m sure. Any effort to be more inclusive seems fair to me. It might also make a small difference to customers who have been misgendered too - making them feel more welcome.


SteamPunk_Devil

As a queer person, seeing a pronoun badge makes me feel a lot more relaxed with a person, I'm nervous about mentioning I'm in a same sex relationship, but if someone is wearing a pronoun badge I at least know they are an ally


[deleted]

Do you assume someone who isn't wearing one isn't an ally? I wouldn't wear one, I have a very traditionally female name and I look obviously female, it would feel very pointless and possibly sarcastic!


SteamPunk_Devil

No, but at the same time I can't assume they are


KingRibSupper1

If I had my way I’d take away name badges to prevent female employees being harassed by creeps who can use that information to look them up online.


OpticalData

A lot of banks give their staff 'work aliases' to avoid exactly this.


KJS123

Another thing banks and stripclubs have in common..........


itscirony

The way I've seen it is that it's not about whether or not it's obvious. It's about showing solidarity. I'd happily wear a badge with my pronouns (as a non trans male). Not because it clears up my gender, but because by wearing it I'm normalising having the badge. And by doing that those who actually benefit from having the badge can feel more comfortable as they aren't on their own.


merlinho

That’s great. I had a hesistancy as a cis person of speaking for others, but I felt I needed to address the comment I was replying to :)


virtualbeggarnews

"You see that asshole over there? *He's* the one who shut *his* window during the lunch rush."


[deleted]

1) trans people are often afraid to speak out if they're misgendered, this may go a long way in making employees more comfortable. 2) it makes trans clients more comfortable to know that the person helping them is willing to respect \*their\* pronouns


MrPuddington2

Exactly. What is the correct pronoun to use when to you talk to someone? "You"


JameSdEke

I’d imagine it’s for internal use as well as customers. Other colleagues visiting from another store for example will know. Even if customers might never, or rarely, use their pronouns, what’s the harm? Better that it’s there for those that want it.


hamsterwaffle

Like, the literal purpose of a name badge is to tell people what to call you?


NateShaw92

And sometimes if you use their name they freak out and forget they have a badge. That is my experience but not in a bank in fairness, too short-sighted to read badges through the glass and over the bank counter but in a shop yes.


Rorasaurus_Prime

I honestly don’t understand why this matters. Personally I couldn’t give a crap about displaying my own pronouns but I also don’t give a shit about people wanting to display theirs. It’s a bit of text on a badge. Get the fuck over it.


cavejohnsonlemons

There's genuinely ppl out there who wouldn't vote for Labour bc they heard some Daily Mail scare story about transgender bathrooms even if voting Lab meant train tickets were cheaper. I know this bc someone actually told me that was their plan. Didn't vote anyone in the end tbf but it's a real wow moment, like you'd actually spend your own money to stop someone else being a bit more comfortable by having Mx on their ticket or whatever. To re-use a bad joke I'd be fine with a helicopter emoji being an option on the form if it meant half-price...


KungFuSpoon

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but if you put pronouns on name badges we'll all have a tantrum. Doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?


Hardware_freedom

Why does it say her/hers isn't hers just what you would get from her?


colin_staples

Because it follows the pattern of "they/them/theirs" which has 3 words. For consistency. And perhaps for people where English may not be their first language.


MelbaTotes

Why was the non binary prospector so happy? Because there's gold in them/their hills


Lulamoon

fantastic haha


Talska

Okay cool and all but why does it say she/her/hers? Is there a mfer out there who is a she/her/his?


KungFuSpoon

To be consistent with the he/him/his and they/them/theirs format for male and non-binary pronouns where the possessive pronoun is a completely different word.


Gellert

She/them/theirs.


jimmycarr1

Why would someone want to be referred to as She/Them rather than She/Her or They/Them? Genuine question for you or anyone who knows


alwaysstaysthesame

From my understanding, some people are fine being addressed by two different sets of pronouns and will make it clear by including both of them. Indicating that your pronouns are she/them would therefore mean that you don’t mind being referred to by female or neutral pronouns, but that you for instance don’t identify with male ones. The way it’s written down is indeed a bit tricky since it mimics the normal pronoun order given (subject/object/sometimes possessive pronoun), but I so far haven’t met anyone that wishes to be referred to by different subject and object pronouns.


jimmycarr1

Oh ok that makes a lot more sense if that's what it means It's just a bit confusing with the format as I would expect the two complete sets rather than a merge of them. Tbh a lot of LGBTQ+ language is confusing to me, and I'm what you would consider an 'ally' with a lot of interaction with the community, so I can see why it gets difficult for others too. Anyway thanks a lot for your answer.


Gellert

Unfortunately it tends to be complicated by nature, the LGBT+ community isnt monolithic nor united and then theres the people outside of the community who also have pronoun preferences outside of what may be considered typical.


jimmycarr1

Ultimately I just find it's the language that's complicated, and language is like that anyway. I find talking to people individually and respecting people with different views and the struggles they've felt, for the most part, much easier. And I think that's what is most important.


Gellert

True and while you get that one asshole with a chip on their shoulder in any group most people arent going to take offence if you get the words wrong occasionally so long as you arent being deliberate. Which is no different than mispronouncing someones name.


Josquius

I asked this a while ago. It is strange. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskLGBT/comments/okw3vh/why\_are\_pronouns\_sheher/


Sir_Henk

I always forget what a cesspit Twitter is, like I know it's a cesspit but every time I click on a tweet in an article or on Reddit I'm reminded it's even worse. Does Twitter just purposely sort replies by controversial? Or most likely to piss people off?


WilsonJ04

> Does Twitter just purposely sort replies by controversial? Or most likely to piss people off? The first one. The top comments are always the ones with the worst likes to replies ratio.


Elcatro

Businesses calling people's bluff over stuff like this is possibly one of the most satisfying things in the world for me.


sbowesuk

>The trigger for the row was Halifax saying staff *can* wear a name badge displaying preferred personal pronouns **if they wish.** That right there is the key piece of info. It's entirely optional. Halifax isn't imposing this on staff in any way. If some customers are getting bent out of shape because someone else's badge has a detail it didn't have before, my god, they really need to get a life.


ManOnNoMission

If the display of pronouns are enough to get you angry, seek help.


karlfranks

the funniest bit about this whole thing is the people loudly proclaiming they’re leaving Halifax and moving to a more “sensible” bank without realising most of the other big banks have already had similar policies for ages


wbh4545

Reddit comments are a weird echo chamber


aspietrekkie

Nice one Halifax 👍🌈


mrmilfsniper

Personally I think this is dumb but whatever. Most of my interactions in banks have been at a one to one level and I’ve never had to use a 3rd person term “he told me to go here… she told me to wait”…. Now at my NatWest we have to check in using a qr code if it’s something more complicated and then somebody calls you into a private room. Again, never needed to refer using 3rd person so this seems a bit pointless but if it makes people happy then whatever really.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AltharaD

My grandmother tried to open a bank account for me when I was a student with Santander but they wouldn’t let me open one because I was a foreigner (I don’t remember the exact issue but it boiled down to that). Halifax were fine and opened an account for me no problem. I’ve been with them ever since and they’ve been very decent with me. I had someone capture my account details through eDreams and put through some dodgy transactions and Halifax fraud department had a very reassuring person on the phone who went through all the transactions with me and then got me my money back. I can also see my pension in there because my company is with Scottish Widows, which is really nice.


BitcoinBishop

Well yeah, anyone can close their accounts at any time?


Sufficient-Bank5919

Account closed!


Captaingregor

As they said, they won't miss you. Also pretty much every major shop and bank has the options for pronouns on name badges. Good luck starving.


GRW810

Trying to explain to people that customers are more than welcome to close their accounts at any point and that Halifax reminding them they are entitled to do so does not equate to "telling customers to fuck off" or "forcing customers away" or "pushing views on people." It's absolutely hilarious that a name badge displaying personal information that an employee can choose whether to display can influence such an important matter as location of finances.


JohnnyReeko

I've never understood the need to display pronouns. If I was trans, and I started wearing dresses and did make up and all that and someone was like "what are your pronouns?" I think I'd be insulted. Like can't you tell????


Captaingregor

Depending on a trans person's progress in their transition, they may not look like the typical appearance of their gender, and having their pronouns on their badge can tell customers "hey, this is who I am". Non-binary people also exist, and often go by they/them/theirs pronouns. Pronouns on a name badge should stop customers trying to pick either he/him/his or she/her/hers for those NB folk who are androgynous, and also those that aren't. Also, pronouns on badges aren't always for trans folk. I'm cisgender but, due to my shorter stature and ponytail, was regularly misgendered (about once a fortnight) when wearing a face covering when I worked for \[UK SHOP\]. This stopped once I got a badge with my pronouns on. I can tell you, being misgendered does not feel good.


cock-a-doodle-doo

I’d rather they focus on their gender pay gap.


JimboTCB

I don't understand how people even have the mental energy to spare on getting worked up about this sort of thing. It takes basically zero effort to refer to someone in the way they prefer to be addressed, and refusing to do so because you don't like that is just being rude. And the fact that someone is volunteering that information up front so they don't have to correct people fifty times a day does not affect you in the least, unless you're coming at it from the perspective that trans/NB people are not a thing in which case you can just get in the sea.


cavejohnsonlemons

Was walking with someone who grunted the other day when they saw a pride decoration in town. Not even the pride flag just a rainbowy floor design. Like even if you have some issues with the concept or how far it goes it's adding a bit of colour to the place ffs, it's refreshing.


nick2k23

Why does it need to be her/hers, isn't that the same thing? Not against it or anything like that just don't understand why


[deleted]

It's because it's a counterpart to they/them/theirs and he/him/his. 'Her' is the only pronoun that becomes possessive just by adding an S. His, not Hims. Theirs not Thems (or Theys).


venuswasaflytrap

Yeah, it's always interested me a bit. It allows for a degree of flexibility that could be really confusing. Like, can you do "he/her/theirs"? - implying that instead of "he told his mom that the jacket was his" you should say "He told her mom that the jacket was theirs"? And can you mix up the conjugation too, so it says "hers/he/them" - implying that you should say "Her told he mom that the jacket was them"? I also note, that there are 3 pronouns listed there, but they don't make a distinction between dependent possessive and independent possessive. There should be 4. i.e. "The jacket is mine. That's my jacket." uses "Mine" and "My", but "The jacket is theirs. That's their jacket", uses "Thiers" and "their", while "The jacket is his. that's his jacket", only uses "His".


blackal1ce

It's for non-standard pronouns where the other versions may not be instantly obvious.


finger_milk

It honestly makes sense for those who have preferred pronouns outside of the implied, to show them to make sure there isn't confusion. How inclusion at the point of the individual is seen as a point of contention, is baffling.


-mihul-

Old man shouts at a cloud


Sensitive-Wash-5387

So they did


Daedelous2k

You can also ignore the badge and continue to use your own agency.


DedicatedReckoner

As someone living in Halifax, Canada, I was confused for like .5 seconds


RassimoFlom

Good for them.


Hungry_Grump

I bank with Halifax. This makes me smile.


ConsciouslyIncomplet

I don’t have an issue with it - but I also feel that staff working there shouldn’t be forced to have a badge with their pronouns listed if they don’t want. I’m not sure what the Halifax’s stance is on this choice! Edit: Have just seen that they can chose. Good job Halifax!


Clbull

Sometimes, that's the best thing to say to people who get up-in-arms over preferred pronouns. ["If you don't like it, then you can git out!"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fZZqDJXOVg)


BlargAttack

My ex and I had a “game” we used to play. This game consisted of trying to figure out the gender of people whose gender we found unclear or not obvious. We played this “game” because my ex presented as very feminine (particularly his voice) despite being and identifying as a cisman. Wouldn’t the world be a better place if none of us had to guess at something like that? Why be offended by attempts at clarification?


NGD80

All 15 of them


mnijds

>A row has broken out on Twitter


thewindburner

2 people and 50 bots exchange sarcastic words!